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

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

In the Vox Political Article entitled “Here’s why a Decent NHS pay rise will help us all,” Mike Sivier highlights how “Paying NHS staff more money will improve the UK’s economy massively. That’s the educated opinion of Tax Research UK’s Richard Murphy, and who are we to argue with him?” If only our politicians would review Murphys sound common sense, Sivier says “In his latest a video clip, Mr Murphy explains that the Tory government’s decision to offer only a derisory one per cent pay increase, less than the rate of inflation, is actually harmful to its own hope of economic recovery. The Tories have based their offer on a false belief that the NHS does not contribute to the economy. This is easily disproved because a person who is fit and healthy is clearly more able to create profit than somebody who is ill or injured. The benefit to the economy provided by the NHS has actually been measured and it seems that for every £1 invested in the health service, the economy benefits by between £2 and £4.”

Sivier rightly insists “That’s a hell of a markup! Think about it. Most supermarkets operate on the basis of profits between, what, five and 15 per cent, if I recall correctly. This is a profit of up to four hundred per cent. In a nation that badly needs to re-establish its economy after Covid-19, not to mention Brexit, that’s not to be sniffed at, but sniffing at it is exactly what Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak and the other Tories are doing. At the moment there are 80,000 staff vacancies in the health service because the wages aren’t enough to compensate for the long hours, stress and heartbreak involved. This, along with the ongoing effects of Covid-19, means that patients aren’t getting the treatment, even the routine work, they need and there is a knock-on effect for the economy because they are being prevented from getting back into it and producing the content of work they should be able to provide at the standard they are expected to.”

Sivier reports on the rediculous Tory defence that quoting the PM “It’s as much as we can give,’ said Boris Johnson. But this is sheer short-sightedness. A five per cent pay rise, as suggested by Mr Murphy, would pay for itself as the benefits spread through the economy.” He says “This Writer is left wondering whether Johnson is deliberately sabotaging the health service in order to make privatisation more acceptable; if it can’t recruit staff, then perhaps it should be handed over to private firms. The trouble with that is, private firms won’t pay any better because they’ll be busily grubbing for profits for their shareholders and they won’t provide the service the NHS offers because most people simply won’t be able to afford their prices. So the economy will suffer a much greater downturn as increasing numbers of people fall into illnesses from which they simply won’t be able to get up.”

Sivier warns “It is economic idiocy. But don’t take my word for it. Here’s Mr Murphy” he says providing the latest Murphy Video for our viewing. He admits that there is “One part of the clip that I don’t understand is where he says the NHS is perceived to be free. It isn’t and never has been. Originally, the cost of the service was said to be paid by National Insurance. Nowadays I think that is not true, or certainly not as true as in the past. Much of the cost is now said to come from general taxation (although we know that tax doesn’t actually work like that; the money taken back by the government is more correctly said to be recycled into use to pay for the NHS). Either way, the NHS is at least partially supported with payments from the general public. It isn’t free and never has been. Isn’t it funny how that disappears from the minds of politicians whenever it becomes convenient?”

In the London Economic Article entitled “NHS: Government’s own impact assessment shows 1% would hit BAME and Women workers hardest” Joe Mellor says that “This damning document proves that this paltry offer would hit the living standards of women workers and minority groups hardest. What is more, it proves that Ministers knew this and went ahead anyway. 80 per cent of workers affected by the NHS 1 per cent pay recommendation are women, according to the Treasury’s public sector pay Equality Impact Assessment released by GMB Union. It comes as a senior Government minister has said he hopes NHS staff will be given an ‘appropriate’ pay rise this year. The Government is facing a furious outcry after calling for a headline increase of just 1 per cent in its submission last week to the NHS pay review body. Ministers have argued that it was all that could be afforded following the massive hit to the public finances caused by the pandemic at a time when most public sector workers were facing a pay freeze.”

Mellor reports that “Justice Secretary Robert Buckland appeared to strike a more conciliatory note, saying that the submission to the pay review body was only the ‘beginning of a process’. ‘The final recommendations have not yet been made,’ he told BBC Breakfast. ‘We have got to remember that in large other swathes of the public sector there will be a pay freeze save for the lowest paid. I don’t think at the moment we are at the end of this process. I think that we need to see what the recommendations are, and I very much hope that the outcome, whilst it might not be an outcome in these difficult circumstances that will result in pay rises that everybody would want to see, that the work that has been done by NHS workers will be recognised in a way that is appropriate, bearing in mind the constraints we are all under. ‘It is not for me to start to prejudge what the outcome of the negotiations is. I am simply pointing out that we are at the beginning of that process and we will have to see what the recommendations are.”

According to Mellor “A Treasury Equality Impact Assessment seen by Ministers found that their policies on NHS pay would disproportionately affect women and BAME workers, new documents reveal. The news comes against a backdrop of growing anger against the Government’s 1 per cent pay recommendation for NHS workers in England after a year of the coronavirus pandemic. The paper, which was compiled by civil servants in November for the Comprehensive Spending Review, was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, is being released by GMB Union which represents NHS workers. According to the assessment, ‘women are relatively overrepresented in the NHS workforce compared to the [wider] public sector.’ 80 per cent NHS workers are women, the analysis found.”

Mellor reports that “Almost a quarter (23 per cent) of NHS workers are members of an ethnic minority, the Treasury said. The Equality Impact Assessment said that ‘Asian and Asian British workers are relatively overrepresented in the NHS workforce when compared to the [wider] public sector. In particularly, 8% of the NHS workforce identify as Asian or Asian British whereas only 1% of the public sector identify as Asian or Asian British. In addition, there is a smaller proportion of individuals that identify as White in the NHS workforce relative to the [wider] public sector.”’ He says that “the 1 per cent recommendation, which would be a pay cut in real terms, contradicts a statement in the Treasury’s internal document that the Government would ‘exclude all members of the NHS workforce from public sector pay restraint’.” This is the reality of the hidden Tory Government agenda of ‘Decimating Down!’

Mellor notes that “Inflation this year is projected at 1.5 per cent (CPI) or 2.5 per cent (RPI) by the Office for Budgetary Responsibility. The Treasury said that it had not been able to assess whether its pay policies would have a disproportionate impact on the characteristics of ‘marital status, sexual orientation, gender reassignment and maternity,’ which are protected under the Equality Act. Despite these limitations, the Equality Impact Assessment concluded that ‘the government does not consider that the implementation of public sector pay restraint over the spending review period will result in any unjustified differential impact.’
The Treasury was criticised in November by the Women’s Budget Group for failing to carry out meaningful impact assessments, who said that ‘women and minority groups have experienced the worst impacts of the pandemic, in part due to the failure to do proper EIAs [Equality Impact Assessments]’.”

Mellor reports that “Rachel Harrison, GMB National Officer, said: ‘The Government must U-turn on its disgraceful plan to impose a real-terms pay cut on NHS workers. This damning document proves that this paltry offer would hit the living standards of women workers and minority groups hardest. What is more, it proves that Ministers knew this and went ahead anyway. Our NHS workers have risked everything to keep us safe during the coronavirus outbreak, now they deserve a real pay rise after a decade of austerity and real terms cuts to pay. Many of our members are struggling to make ends meet. Ministers should do the decent thing and mark the week of International Women’s Day by changing course and setting out plans for a real pay rise for all NHS workers.” We must aggressively contest the Tory deceitful ‘lev…up’ lie by totally removing this Fake News myth from all public discourse.

In the London Economic Article entitled “‘Spineless’ Matt Hancock fails to face MPs over 1% NHS pay rise proposal” Joe Mellor points out that “A Junior Minister was sent instead… Health Secretary Matt Hancock has swerved questions from MPs over the recommendation to give NHS workers in England a 1% pay rise. Junior health minister Helen Whately was sent in his place to respond to an urgent question from Labour. Shadow health secretary Jon Ashworth had demanded Mr Hancock appear in the House of Commons to make a statement on the recommendations. Peter Stefanovic Tweeted: ‘Spineless Health Secretary Matt Hancock hasn’t even bothered to turn up to answer urgent questions today on NHS pay, sending Social Care Minister Helen Whately instead.’ He said: ‘I am grateful for the minister (Ms Whately), but where is the Secretary of State? Why isn’t the Secretary of State here to defend a Budget that puts up tax for hard-working family and cuts pay for hard-working nurses?”

Mellor stressed the points raised “The Secretary of State has stood at that despatch box repeatedly waxing lyrical, describing NHS staff as heroes, saying they are the very best of us, and now he is cutting nurses’ pay. Last summer, when asked by Andrew Marr if nurses deserved a real-terms pay rise, he replied, ‘well, of course, I want to see people properly rewarded, absolutely’ and yet now he is cutting nurses’ pay.’ Ahead of the urgent question, Downing Street declined to rule out a one-off bonus for NHS workers amid continued anger over the pay recommendation. The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: ‘We have been clear that we think the 1% pay rise is what is affordable. I’m not going to comment on speculation. We’ve set out what we think is affordable, it’s now for the pay review body to look at that and look at the other evidence and come forward with their recommendation.” Of course ‘affordability’ is contingent on the public continuing to believe in the deliberate Tory lie that the UK is in debt to the tune of £300Bn!

Meanwhile that precious, heavily guarded, ‘Magic Money Tree’ is being carefully nurtured in the plush garden of Number 10! Forget Quantitive Easing to inject cash into circulation for the benefit of everyone in the UK; the PM has a few political favours to pay off. But, in typical despotic fashion, new PR frills are necessary to increase the naked narcissist Emporer’s personal aggrandizement; plus his supreme status demands lavishly increased opulence and comfort for his ‘love nest’ with Carrie. At Vox Political online Mike Sivier remarked “After £2.6m ‘TV studio’, Johnson’s £9m ‘situation room’ is adding insult to injury! Seriously? Some prime ministers would have taken the hint after a £2.6 million TV studio attracted flak, first as a white elephant vanity project that was built only to gather dust, and then when it was announced alongside a meagre one per cent pay rise for NHS staff. Not Boris Johnson!”

Sivier reports that the PM “…has decided to announce a further £9 million ‘situation room’ to be used as a command centre during emergencies like terror attacks and disease epidemics. What’s wrong with Cabinet Office Briefing Room ‘A,’ the eponymous ‘COBRA’? That is, what’s wrong with it apart from the fact that Johnson seems allergic to the place? It took months for anybody to entice him into it when the Covid-19 pandemic first struck. But here’s a thing: There’s no reason to believe Johnson will darken the doors of this new facility, should an emergency occur. He’s far more likely to run away again like the coward he is. This is money for old rope, far better spent on developments the UK needs. This is not the time for Johnson’s over-expensive vanity projects. Someone should have the guts to tell him.” Instead the BBC are hyping-up ‘Boris’s Burrow,’ another costly, hair-brained scheme for connecting Ireland to the mainland via a minefield! Well, there’s a lot more space to hide in a tunnel than an industrial size fridge!

As the debate over this contentious pay issue heats up the public are even more outraged by a really disgusting display of ‘Nasty Party’ meanness from one hereditary Tory peer, who demonstrated just how much the wealthy elite detest allowing the meagrest crumbs of well earned compensation to fall from their bulging banquet table of obscene neocon profiteering. In another London Economic Article entitled “Hereditary Tory peer claims nurses have ‘enviable’ job security amid pay backlash’ Henry Goodwin highlighted the fact that ‘Health minister Lord Bethell, who is entitled to sit in the House of Lords until his death, defended the pay proposal, blasted as ‘paltry’ by health unions, because NHS workers have ‘secure jobs’. A hereditary Tory peer has defended the government’s planned 1 per cent pay rise for the NHS by claiming that nurses have job security that many would ‘envy’.”

Goodwin elaborates on just who this ‘Lord’ is “A former journalist, nightclub owner and Conservative donor, James Bethell the 5th Baron Bethell joined the House of Lords in 2018, after successfully contesting a hereditary peers’ by-election. Legislation removed all but 92 hereditary peers in 1999. Vacancies that result from death, retirement or resignation are now filled through a so-called by-election. In an electorate of 47, Lord Bethell won with 26 votes. Despite taking an unpaid ministerial role, Lord Bethell can claim more than £300 in allowances for attending the House, and can also claim travel expenses and subsidised restaurant deals. Defending the 1 per cent figure, he said: ‘There are millions of people out of work out of the back of this pandemic. There are lots of people who have had an extremely tough time and who face a period of unemployment.”

Goodwin reported that Lord Bethel had continued his attack by saying “’Nurses are well-paid for the job. They have a secure job and they have other benefits. There are many people in this country who look upon professional jobs within the NHS with some envy and we shouldn’t forget the fact that some public sector jobs are, in fact, extremely well-paid.’ Lord McNicol of West Kilbride, Labour’s former general secretary, responded: ‘Government ministers have time and time again stated that supporting nurses is a top priority, but as unions have pointed out an offer that amounts to £3.50 a week looks more like a kick in the teeth than a top priority. ‘Nurses and other healthcare professionals have had to work in some of the most difficult, demanding and dangerous circumstances and they have done so with astonishing care, compassion and commitment. ‘The government has got this badly wrong and I urge them to reconsider their meagre, miserly, measly 1 per cent’.”

In the Canary Article entitled “NHS worker fined £10,000 for organising protest against 1% pay rise,” they exposed the shocking news that “Police have fined the organiser of a nurses’ protest in Manchester £10,000 after shutting down the demonstration against the NHS pay rise. The protesters gathered in Manchester city centre on 7 March said officers told them they would be fined for violating coronavirus (Covid-19) restrictions if they didn’t leave. Unison maintained that the protest, against the government’s 1% pay rise for NHS staff, was safe and socially distanced. Police said about 40 people attended the demonstration in the centre of Manchester, organised by a 61-year-old NHS worker. Another NHS worker, 65, was arrested after initially refusing to leave or provide details when police broke up the demonstration. She was later de-arrested and fined £200.”

The Canary report that “As protesters were told to leave, mental health worker and Unison rep Karen Reissmann addressed the demonstrators: Unfortunately the police have told us we can’t proceed with this despite what’s going on in the health service.
We’ve been told we will not be able to go ahead with this, I’ll be fined and reported to my employer and disciplined and people here will be fined as well, so we will therefore be shutting it down. I think we’ve made the point we wanted to make, we sent a message to the government. I think it’s outrageous that somehow this is deemed illegal when the size of the crowd here will be ten times bigger in hundreds and thousands of schools tomorrow morning. This isn’t about safety, this is about the government trying to stamp down on protest which I think is a dying shame. The health service will lose out. 1% pay rise. There has been widespread outrage over the Department of Health and Social Care’s recommendation that NHS staff receive only a 1% pay rise.”

The Canary report that “NHS Providers said the long-term funding plan for the NHS, set out by the government, had assumed a pay rise of 2.1% for 2021-22. The Royal College of Nursing is supporting members who want to strike following the pay rise. It has set up at £35m industrial action fund. Unison has also urged people to protest outside their houses on 11 March at 8pm by doing a slow clap. Labour has argued the pay rise amounts to a ‘real terms cut’, and some Conservative backbenchers have also criticised the proposal. Public gatherings have been banned under lockdown restrictions, but some have raised concerns that the right to protest may be under threat as the UK returns to normal. According to Netpol, the government is seeking to amend the Public Order Act in 2021” Under cover of Covid the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship want to introduce their ‘new norma’ of authoritarian oppression that will remain in place for the foreseeable future under one excuse or another: we must not allow this to happen.

The Canary warns that “Netpol said the proposed changes could lead to increased police powers to control protests. It called for the protection of the right to protest, citing evidence from 25 campaign groups that were overwhelmingly in favour of stronger protections on protests.” The police can easily move in and make arrests at small protests, but when the outrage over Government corruption reaches a fever pitch of civil unrest and we all take to the streets on mass the police will require army backup to enforce the authoritarian power of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. We should have challenged and demanded full Investigation of the unfathomable result in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election; that success just emboldened the Tories to increase the level of corrupt profiteering and squandering of public funds. There’s more than enough evidence of corruption to remove the Tories from office but we must summon the courage to fight back, protest and challenge them in Court or we will not rescue our democracy for decades! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Boris Johnson began Prime Minister’s Questions with classic nationalist bragging “The whole House can be proud of the UK’s vaccination program, with more than 22.5 million people now having received their first dose across the UK. We can also be proud of the support the UK has given to the international covid response, including the £548 million we have donated to COVAX. I therefore wish to correct the suggestion from the European Council President that the UK has blocked vaccine exports. Let me be clear: we have not blocked the export of a single covid-19 vaccine or vaccine components. This pandemic has put us all on the same side in the battle for global health. We oppose vaccine nationalism in all its forms. I trust that Members in all parts of the House will join me in rejecting this suggestion and in calling on all our partners to work together to tackle this pandemic.” We should question how much this Tory Government might have pressured AstraZenika to reduce supplies to the EU to enable the PM’s political sparring?

The PM gave his usual ‘meetings’ preamble before Labour’s Daisy Cooper asked the key question on everyone’s mind given the Nursing pay issue and release of information on the abysmal record of a failing program the PM entrusted to serial looser Dido ‘Tallyho’ Harding. Cooper’s scathing rebuke was well put as she inquired “The Government are throwing a staggering £37 billion at a test and trace system that we know has made barely any difference, yet they say they cannot afford to give more than a pitiful 1% pay rise to NHS workers. The Prime Minister has said that he owes his life to them. He stood on the steps of No. 10 and applauded them. So will the Prime Minister do more than pay lip service? Will he pay them the wage that they deserve?”

Boris Johnson started into a familiar pattern of distraction and deliberate obfuscation that has become the hallmark of the PM’s rebuttals at PMQs. He was schooling his Ministers in this deceptive technique in order to detract from the relentless squandering of public funds and repeated Tory failures. It required obsessing over the vaccination program, reveling in huge cash expenditures and compulsory use of the term ‘Levelling up’ to brainwash the public into thinking austerity 2.0 wasn’t being aggressively pursued. He replied “The hon. Lady is indeed right that we owe a huge amount to our nurses, an incalculable debt, which is why I am proud that we have delivered a 12.8% increase in the starting salary of nurses and are asking the pay review body to look at increasing their pay, exceptionally of all the professions in the public sector. As for test and trace, it is thanks to NHS Test and Trace that we are able to send kids back to school and to begin cautiously and irreversibly to reopen our economy and restart our lives.”

Tory MP Mr Gagan Mohindra said “I recently visited Long Marston, Bovingdon, Rickmansworth and Berkhamsted to see the damage that flooding caused to our communities at first hand. Will the Prime Minister assure this House that as the weather gets better we will not lose the momentum of finding long-term, sustainable solutions to prevent flooding in the future and to give residents the security they deserve all year round, irrespective of the weather outside? The PM responded, “I thank my hon. Friend for what he is doing to campaign for his local area on flood defenses. I thank the Environment Agency for the tireless, imaginative and creative work it does to find solutions, and we are investing £5.2 billion to build 2,000 new flood defenses over the next six years.” If this were true it might compensate for a portion of the money Tories have cut from the flood defense budget.

Keir Starmer’s first question was short but not sweet, “Who does the Prime Minister think deserves a pay rise more: an NHS nurse or Dominic Cummings?” The PM started into what was soon to become like a ‘broken record’ of repetitive defensive lies saying “As I told the hon. Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper) earlier on, we owe a massive debt as a society, and I do personally, to the nurses of our NHS. That is why we have asked the public sector pay review body, exceptionally, to look at their pay. I want to stress, however, that, as the House knows, starting salaries for nurses have gone up by 12.8% over the last three years, and it is thanks to the package that this Government have put in place that we now have 10,600 more nurses in our NHS than there were one year ago and 60,000 more in training.” What Johnson fails to recognize or acknowledge is that many among that impressive influx of Nurses brought into service in 2020 were retirees who returned to help out, but their service is purely temporary.

Starmer would have been foolish to stray from this extremely sensitive question so he asked “The Prime Minister says nurses’ pay has gone up; I know he is desperate to distance himself from the Conservatives’ record over the last decade, but as he well knows, since 2010 nurses’ pay has fallen in real terms by more than £800.” He baited the PM further insisting “He did not answer my question, it was a very simple question. The Prime Minister has been talking about affordability; he could afford to give Dominic Cummings a 40% pay rise. He could afford that; now, he is asking NHS nurses to take a real-terms pay cut. How on earth does he justify that?” The public outrage over the conduct and special treatment of the PM’s puppet master remains a gapping Tory wound.

The PM defensively replied “I repeat the point that I have made: I believe that we all owe a massive debt to our nurses and, indeed, all our healthcare workers and social care workers. One of the things that they tell me when I go to hospitals, as I know the right hon. and learned Gentleman does too, is that in addition to pay one of their top concerns is to have more colleagues on the wards to help them with the undoubted stress and strains of the pandemic. That is why we have provided another £5,000 in bursaries for nurses and another £3,000 to help with the particular costs of training and with childcare. It is because of that package that this year we are seeing another 34% increase in applications for nurses. This Government of this party of the NHS are on target to deliver 50,000 more nurses in our NHS.” Johnson is counting on the general public ‘forgetting’ the fact that it was the Tories who removed the Nursing Bursary and burdened Student Nurses with Tuition Fees while working a very demanding apprenticeship!

Missing the very important point regarding replacing funding that was once in place to support Nursing training and not pointing out that many of those who returned to the frontline will soon want to continue their retirement was a missed opportunity. But Starmer responded by saying “The Prime Minister talks about recruitment; there are currently 40,000 nursing vacancies and 7,000 doctors’ vacancies. How on earth does he think a pay cut is going to help to solve that? Frankly, I would take the Prime Minister a bit more seriously if he had not spent £2.6 million of taxpayers’ money on a Downing Street TV studio, or £200,000 on new wallpaper for his flat. They say that charity starts at home, but I think the Prime Minister is taking it a bit too literally. Let me try something very simple: does the Prime Minister accept that NHS staff will be hundreds of pounds worse off a year because of last week’s Budget?”

Johnson needed to offload responsibility for the final decision on Nursing pay so he said “No. Of course, we will look at what the independent pay review body has to say, exceptionally, about the nursing profession, whom we particularly value, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman should also know, and reflect to the House, that under this Government we not only began with a record increase in NHS funding of £33.9 billion, but because of the pandemic we have put another £63 billion into supporting our NHS, on top of the £140 billion of in-year spending. It is because of this Government that in one year alone there are another 49,000 people working in our NHS. That is something that is of massive benefit not just to patients but to hard-pressed nurses as well.”

He still failed to remind the PM he would soon lose many of these staff. Starmer got personal “My mum was a nurse; my sister was a nurse; my wife works in the NHS,I know what it means to work for the NHS. When I clapped for carers, I meant it; the Prime Minister clapped for carers, then he shut the door in their face at the first opportunity. The more you look at the Prime Minister’s decision, the worse it gets, because it is not just a pay cut; it is a broken promise, too. Time and time again he said that the NHS would not pay the price for this pandemic. Two years ago, he made a promise to the NHS in black and white: his document commits to a minimum pay rise of 2.1%. It has been budgeted for, and now it is being taken away. The Prime Minister shakes his head. His MPs voted for it, so why, after everything the NHS has done for us, is he now breaking promise after promise?”

Then Boris Johnson told a ‘Porky’ saying “The right hon. and learned Gentleman voted against the document in question, which just crowns the absurdity of his point. Under this Government we have massively increased funding for our amazing NHS, with the result that, as I say, there are 6,500 more doctors this year than there were last year, 18,000 more healthcare workers and 10,600 more nurses. We are going to deliver our promises, I can tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman that, and we are going to go on and build 40 more hospitals and recruit 50,000 more nurses, and we are going to get on and deliver on our pledges to the British people. We are going to do that because of our sound management of the economy and the fastest vaccine roll-out program of any comparable country which, frankly, if we had followed his precept and his ideas, we would certainly not have been able to achieve.” More PR spin bragging with promises he’s unlikely to fulfill or corrections of past Tory cuts; I thought it was 48 new Hospitals now?

Starmer was so wedded to a predetermined script that he failed to correct the PM or defend the truth of his own voting record! He said “The Prime Minister says that he voted for it; he did. Now he has ripped it up, 2.1% ripped up. If he will not listen to me, he should listen to what his own Conservative MPs are saying about this. This is from his own side. This is what they say, behind you, Prime Minister. ‘It’s inept.’ ‘It’s unacceptable.’ ‘It’s pathetic.’ These are Conservative MPs talking about the Prime Minister’s pay cut for nurses, and that was before his answers today. Perhaps the most telling of all the comments came from another MP, sitting behind him, who said: ‘The public just hear ‘1 per cent’ and think how mean we are.’ Even his own MPs know that he has got this wrong. Why is he going ahead with it?” He will U-turn in deference to a pay review decision be praised for a meager concession!

The PM ‘broken record’ bragging of pseudo generosity was vomit-worthy! “What the public know is that we have increased starting pay for nurses by 12.8% over the past three years. They know that, in the past year, this Government have put another £5,000 bursary into the pockets of nurses, because we support them, as well as the £3,000 extra for training. It is very important that the public sector pay review body should come back with its proposals, and we will, of course, study them. As I say, it is thanks to the investment made by this Government that there are 49,000 more people in the NHS this year than last year. That means that there are 10,600 more nurses helping to relieve the burden on our hard-pressed nurses. That is what this Government are investing in.”

Why didn’t Starmer attack these claims based on their deceptive inaccuracy: the replacement of funding that the Tory Government had taken away in the first place, the recruitment of Nurses driven out of the profession due to low pay and the temporary return of retirees? He just replied “The Prime Minister says, ‘We support them. We’ll reward them.’ He is cutting their pay. ‘Not true’, he says. Prime Minister, a 1% rise versus a 1.7% inflation rise is a real-terms cut. If he does not understand that, we really are in trouble. Mr Speaker, the Government promised honesty, but the truth is that they can afford to give Dominic Cummings a 40% pay rise, and they cannot afford to reward the NHS properly. The mask really is slipping, and we can see what the Conservative party now stands for cutting pay for nurses; putting taxes upon families. He has had the opportunity to change course, but he has refused to do so. If he’s so determined to cut NHS pay, will he at least show some courage and put it to a vote in this Parliament?”

The PM lied “The last time that we put this to a vote, the right hon. and learned Gentleman voted against it, as I said before. We are increasing pay for nurses. We are massively increasing our investment in the NHS. We are steering a steady course, whereas he weaves and wobbles from one week to the next. One week he is attacking us and saying that we should be doing more testing, and the next week he is denouncing us for spending money on testing. One week he calls for a faster roll-out of PPE, and the next week he is saying that we spent too much. He has to make up his mind. One week, he calls for a faster vaccination roll-out when he actually voted, although he claims to have forgotten it, to stay in the European Medicines Agency. Perhaps he would like to confirm that he voted to stay in the European Medicines Agency, which would have made that vaccine roll-out impossible. We vaccinate and get on with delivering for the people of this country. We vaccinate, he vacillates, and that is the difference.”

Starmer had failed to refute the PM’s lie on his voting record so Johnson took the opportunity to reinforce the deception as he started into the main PR Spin of his regular PMQ Party Political Broadcast before his Tory MPs started into their obsequious non-question ‘stroking’ routine. Scott Benton was up first and didn’t disappoint crediting the PM and Tory Government, rather than the NHS, for “The incredible success of our vaccination program…” He was looking forward to a prosperous Summer season in Blackpool and asked the PM to “support a campaign encouraging people to holiday here in the UK…” Latter, in total denial of the incredible damage Brexit has done to our fishing industry, Grimsby’s Tory MP Lia Nici, after hailing the Towns Fund and Humber Freeport and criticizing Labour neglect, appealed for the PM to encourage people to eat ‘British fish;’ (all carrying blue passports?)

Due to technical difficulties with the connection Kirsten Oswald was speaking on behalf of SNP Leader Ian Blackford, when she said “Yesterday, the Prime Minister published his plans for an Erasmus replacement, without any consultation or discussion with the devolved Governments. The replacement scheme offers lower living support, no travel support and no tuition fee support. Why are this Tory Government taking opportunities away from our young people?” The PM remarked “That was a delightfully concise question,” sadly it did not receive an honest answer. Johnson falsely claimed: “the hon. Member is wrong about the difference between Erasmus and the Turing project. Unlike the Erasmus scheme, which overwhelmingly went to kids from better-off homes, the Turing project is designed to help kids across the country, of all income groups, get to fantastic universities around the world.”

Oswald was not content with lies saying “That is just not the case. We know that we cannot trust a word that the Prime Minister says on this. He told us that there was no threat to the Erasmus scheme, but he clearly will not match EU levels of support. And it is not just us saying it; his own Scottish colleague, the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie), told the BBC last week that young people will not benefit from Brexit. The Government have saddled a generation with tuition fee debt, and are now closing the door on Erasmus. It is no wonder that students are choosing the SNP and independence for a prosperous future. Prime Minister, will you think again, do the right thing, engage with our EU friends and rejoin Erasmus?”

The Speaker interveined with a technicality saying “May I just remind Members not to use ‘you’?” Johnson replied: “I think students should choose the Turing project because it is fantastic and reaches out across the whole country. I believe, by the way, that they should reject the SNP, a Scottish nationalist party, Mr Speaker, because it is failing the people of Scotland, failing to deliver on education, failing on crime and failing on the economy. I hope very much that the people of Scotland will go for common sense. Instead of endlessly going on about constitutional issues and endlessly campaigning for a referendum, which is the last thing the people of this country need right now, I think people want a Government who focus on the issues that matter to them, including a fantastic international education scheme like Turing.” His repetition of the childish ‘Nationalist Party’ insult showed his desperation!

The SDLP’s Colum Eastwood MP exposed Boris Johnson’s insane fixation with bridges in his quest for more expansive ways to squander public funds on white elephant vanity projects. Londoners have not forgotten the ‘Garden Bridge’ debacle, but the PM never learns from his failures. Eastwood said “The Prime Minister’s fantasy bridge to Northern Ireland could cost £33 billion, this, while our road and rail networks have been absolutely decimated from decades of underinvestment. The Conservative party got a grand total of 2,399 votes at the last Assembly election. What mandate does he think he has to override the democratically elected people of Northern Ireland to impose a bridge that goes through miles of unexploded munitions and radioactive waste?” Due to the probability of lengthy winter closures, the latest rumor is of a ‘Boris Burrow’ under the Irish sea: great for hiding out in a crisis!

Deeply hurt the PM said “If the hon. Member had read the article I wrote this morning in The Daily Telegraph, he would have seen that the things that we have set out in the Hendy review will be of massive benefit to Northern Ireland. That includes upgrading the A75, which is the single biggest thing that people in Northern Ireland wanted, by the way, and which the Scottish nationalists (dig), the Scottish National party, have totally failed to do. The review also includes better connections east-west within Northern Ireland, which we should be doing, and better connections north-south within the island of Ireland. It’s a fantastic Union connectivity review. The hon. Member should appreciate it; it is the way forward. I am amazed, frankly, by his negativity.” Onerous Brexit red tape has denuded store shelves while breaking an International treaty with the EU has spawned a legal Case, endangers future trade deals with the US and elsewhere as we become untrustworthy; it might also reignite ‘the troubles’ but how about a Boris Bridge?

The SNP’s David Linden critically asked “In extending the £20 uplift to universal credit, which we welcomed at the beginning of the pandemic, the Prime Minister was clearly conceding that social security support in the UK is inadequate, so while I welcome the fact that it has been extended for six months, I would like to see it being made permanent. But can he tell the House why, if it was so inadequate, it was not extended to those on legacy benefits, such as disabled people?” The PM bragged of “doing everything we can” and attacked Labour for wanting to replace dysfunctional Universal Credit. The SDLP’s Claire Hanna highlighted the cost of Northern Ireland’s 16,000 dedicated nurses saying it was “less than 2% of UK sales for just one internet giant, Amazon, whose revenues doubled during lockdown.” She wanted to know why the PM and the Chancellor had not raised the money needed to pay for Covid by applying “a modest windfall tax on those businesses who have benefited so much….” The PM waffled about G7.

Labour’s Alison McGovern said “In this House, we all know the importance of the people who have looked after our vulnerable loved ones over the past year when we have been unable to do so, so will the Prime Minister explain to me why in this country we have 375,000 care workers on zero-hours contracts?” To which the PM made a deceitful excuse claiming “record increases in the living wage” and boasted of “vaccinated care home workers and their elderly charges” without acknowledging responsibility for the ‘Holocaust in Care!’ Tory MP James Grundy thanked the PM for his commitment to “levelling up the north, the benefits of which we are already beginning to see, with a £15 million allocation from the Government’s transforming cities fund…” But Labour MP Dan Jarvis challenged this deception by saying “If the Prime Minister is serious about levelling up the country, does he honestly think that favoring the Chancellor’s Richmondshire constituency over Barnsley for financial support is the best way to do it?” Ouch!

Johnson’s loyal Tory sycophants had raised non-questions in the usual manner, showering praise on the PM for copious funding promised while vying for more corrupt squandering on pet projects in their patch. Tory MPs have gleefully expressed approval for Freeports that will facilitate their race to the bottom. If we fail to robustly challenge this blatant corruption, they will continue to take copious advantage of ‘Pork-Barrel’ projects like this, hoovering up gerrymandered cash from the grossly misnamed ‘Leveling-up Fund’ in the same way they warped the ‘Towns Fund’. Our only hope of derailing this gravy-train of profiteering and exploitation is to remove this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship from power as there is no way to win this relentless war of attrition. Are we a legitimate functioning democracy? This obscene level of Tory corruption is so extreme that even without demanding a full Investigation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, repeated abuses of power are more than enough to legally call out the PM and his rabid Tory cabal.

PMQs ended as Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth said “On a point of order, Mr Speaker.” The Speaker asked “Is the point of order relevant to Prime Minister’s questions?” Ashworth replied “It is indeed, Mr Speaker. The Prime Minister has twice, from that Dispatch Box, said that the Labour Opposition voted against the NHS Funding Bill and the 2.1% increase for NHS staff. This is not the case. Indeed, in the debate, as Hansard will show, I was explicit that we would not divide the House. Can you, Mr Speaker, use your good offices to get the Prime Minister to return to the House to correct the record? And do you agree that if the Prime Minister wants to cut nurses’ pay, he should have the courage of his convictions and bring a vote back to the House?” The Speaker said “May I just say that that is not a point of order? It is certainly a point of clarification, and that part has been achieved. But I am certainly not going to be drawn into a debate, as the shadow Secretary of State well knows.” Lying Boris bolted for the door! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

The Tory decision to sneak in derisory 1% pay rise for the Nursing staff that have done so much to save lives during the pandemic, even putting their own lives at risk, has seriously enraged people right across the UK as it is so offensive. However, the thing that we must maintain a laser-like focus on, is debunking the lie that there is a massive £300Bn debt to pay back: Richard Murphy’s Video helps tear down this crippling myth. Meanwhile the biased BBC and mainstream Media are peddling the Tories callous Fake News, created to help justify a new wave of rebranded austerity that as usual will target the working poor and the most vulnerable. In the Canary Article entitled “Don’t hate HMRC staff over their 13% pay rise,” they warn of the classic ‘divide and conquer’ tactic being used to turn anger towards each other, detracting from real issue of deliberate inequality perpetrated by our Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. They say “People have been reacting to the news that the government is giving some HMRC staff a pay rise.”

The Canary say “Understandably, they’ve been making comparisons to NHS staff’s 1% increase. But as some people have said on social media, we shouldn’t begrudge HMRC staff a decent raise.” They analyzed the fact “That 13% HMRC pay rise,” noting that “The FDA is the trade union for ‘professionals and managers in public service’. It recently wrote about the government pay deal for some HMRC staff. The FDA said that talks on this pay deal started in July 2020 and now the government and trade unions have reached a deal. The FDA said this was: a three-year deal giving an average pay award of 13% across the term. A 3% increase would be awarded in March 2021 (backdated to June 2020), followed by a 5% increase in June 2021 and a 5% increase in June 2022. It wasn’t just the FDA which was involved. Other bodies such as the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union were too.”

The Canary highlighted that “Some people on social media are upset about it. This is because the Tories are only giving NHS staff 1%.” Rachael Swindon Tweeted: “How on Earth can the government justify a 13% pay rise for HMRC staff while insulting NHS staff with a derisory 1%? And how comes hardly anyone knows about the 13% increase? Sneaky and callous.” Labour Front Tweeted: “HMRC staff receiving a 13% pay rise Anyone else a bit annoyed that NHS staff only got a 1% increase?” But they said “People also made important points. Lina said: I don’t think the argument should be that HMRC staff aren’t deserving of pay raises, but nurses are, it should be give them both pay rises.” Another user, Kaine Milner pointed out: “I think what people are getting at is that HMRC staff aren’t on the front line, in crowded COVID wards, doing 18-hour shifts day after day with very limited PPE. Especially in the first wave when a lot less was known about the virus. NHS should have 13% pay rise and HMRC 1%.”

Danny responding in HMRC’s defense Tweeted: “HMRC payrise has nothing to do with the pandemic it’s to correct 10 years of pay freezes and is coming from existing HMRC budget so is not costing the govt any additional money. It’s also over 3 years. 3% backdated to 2020. 5% 2021. 5% 2023. Really not a big rise when broken down.” But that is the “Divide and conquer” point the Canary are trying to have us recognize saying “Moreover, people pointed out that it plays into the Tories’ divide and conquer agenda, among other things.” Katy Tweeted: “Perhaps an ulterior motive of the government’s 1% pay rise for NHS staff and 13% for HMRC staff is to play the politics of divide and conquer so that the NHS will be easier to privatize.” Responding to Lina’s point re: “…give them both pay rises,” Old Git Tweeted: “This is the game. Treat people with varying degrees of unfairness, and encourage them to resent each other for it.” “Of course, in reality most public sector staff have seen their real-term pay take a hit since 2010.”

The Canary say that “As Unison pointed out, the cost of living (inflation) in the last decade rose by 35.6%. It noted that: The average public sector worker has seen an even steeper 14% decline in the value of their wages. For the public sector worker who has not benefited from any incremental progression in their pay, the cut has been 18%, leaving their 2020 wage over £6,800 down on the value of their earnings in 2009 and the accumulated loss from their wage failing to keep pace with inflation each year standing at over £53,307. So, HMRC staff’s 13% rise across three years barely makes up for a lost decade.” They say “Meanwhile, as one Twitter user said, the situation for nurses is dire.” Tory Fibs Tweeted: “Nurses’ Pay: • Given £3.50 a week rise in pay • But a £1.76 a week rise in tax from Apr 2022 • Inflation to rise by £7.00 a week By next April, nurses will be £5.26 a week worse off. A real terms deduction of £270 from their wages.”

The Canary insists “Let’s not forget the ‘inadequate’ £20 Universal Credit uplift. Nor must we ignore the millions of legacy benefit claimants who haven’t got any increase at all. The number of households living in destitution more than doubled in 2020. But never mind.” They emphasize the stark contrast at the elite end of the scale saying “Because while all this was going on, Boris Johnson’s former aide Dominic Cummings got a 40% pay rise in 2020. And MPs, meanwhile, got an ‘inflation-busting 3.1% pay rise, bringing their annual salary close to an eye-watering £82k. So we shouldn’t be angry at other workers earning more money. Our anger should be directed at a system and its gatekeepers which allow so many people to live in poverty in the first place. HMRC staff getting scraps off the Tories’ table is the thin end of the wage crisis wedge.”

The Good Law Project just sent me this informative email concerning the latest scam in the ongoing Tory Government corruption it said that: “Buried in the small print of last week’s Budget is what looks like an attack on yet another core constitutional principle: that public money should not be misappropriated to private ends, here the ends of the Conservative Party. What Rishi Sunak said was that he was going to spend the vast sum of £4.8bn on “redrawing the economic map” through a ‘Levelling Up Fund.’ But the evidence suggests much of that money is instead going to redrawing the political map: prosperous areas with Conservative MPs are being prioritized over struggling areas with Labour MPs. Analysis carried out by the Financial Times revealed that Conservative areas were consistently pushed up the queue for money and Labour voting areas pushed down the list. Diane Coyle, the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at Cambridge University, described the bias in favour of Tory seats as ‘pretty blatant really’.”

“Although the Treasury promised it would show its workings they have yet to be published. Professor Coyle was, once again, pretty scathing: ‘I am sure there are civil servants trying to retrofit the methodology to justify the rankings as we speak.’ This is pork-barrel politics on a grand scale. £4.8bn is more than enough to give our 670,000 nurses a pay rise of 25% rather than the meager below-inflation 1% offered to them. We are deeply unhappy at this and have instructed Bindmans LLP, backed by a team of public law Counsel and a leading academic, to write to the Treasury, demanding it makes good on its promise to show its workings. If those workings reveal, as independent analysis suggests, a misuse of public money to benefit the Conservative Party we will issue proceedings without delay. Thank you, Jolyon Maugham Director of Good Law Project.”

It is important to let that shocking ratio they highlighted sink in: public funds to pay for Tory gerrymandering are enough to secure a 25% pay rise for all NHS Nurses! But who else has been excluded from Sunak support packages and more importantly, why were they abandoned? In the Canary Article entitled “Rishi Sunak just made a shocking DWP admission,” they draw our attention to his massive blunder saying “Rishi Sunak just made perhaps the most damning admission of the 2021 Budget. His comment was about the £20 a week Universal Credit uplift. And it actually exposed why he and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) haven’t done the same for legacy benefits. In short, workers are worthy of extra money. Sick and disabled people are not. Campaigner and financial journalist Martin Lewis interviewed Sunak on the Thursday 4 March edition of Lewis’s ITV Money Show. The host was putting the public’s questions to Sunak. And during the show, the question of the DWP £20 Universal Credit uplift came up.”

“The Canary reported that in his Budget, the chancellor said the uplift was staying until September. But as we noted: Some people still claim so-called ‘legacy benefits’. These include Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).” They noted that “The government has not increased their social security payments in line with the Universal Credit/Working Tax Credits uplift. The Oldham Times reported there are 2.2 million legacy benefit claimants, and that ‘three-quarters of these are disabled people’. On the Money Show Lewis read out a question on this. And Sunak’s answer was damning. Lewis said that Clare asked: I’m [a] shielding adult; disabled son for nearly a year; huge extra expenses due to Covid. Why have people who are on legacy disability benefits… not been included in the extra £20 a week [uplift].” It was a valid point that many people fail to understand.

The Canary highlight the fact that “Sunak made it very clear why he and the DWP had not uplifted legacy benefits. He said: The original rationale for doing the temporary uplift in Universal Credit [UC] was to help… people in work but on lower incomes, whose incomes were going to be affected by the crisis. And it’s UC and Working Tax Credit that are the benefits that capture the vast, vast, vast majority if not all of those people.” However they point out that “What he said is not true. First, under ESA people can do permitted work. This is where they can work up to 16 hours a week and earn up to £140. Also, some people aren’t on legacy benefits, but they still claim social security.” But they noted “Back to the Money Show. Sunak then repeated his line on workers: The intervention for UC was to help those in work.”

“Destitute and disabled? Move to ‘UC’,” the Canary try to decipher Sunak’s warped logic, “In other words, the Tories think sick and disabled people don’t need extra money due to the pandemic. But campaign group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) said this is not true. For example, sick and disabled people have needed things like extra PPE and help with the costs of food deliveries. So, as DPAC said: disabled people’s unavoidable expenditure has sharply risen as a direct result of the pandemic. So, what if you’re sick and disabled, on DWP legacy benefits and are destitute? Sunak’s answer was: it is also possible for those that can… [to] transition to UC. But as Jules Pick tweeted: #MartinLewis #RishiSunak wants disabled people on legacy benefits to move to UC to receive the uplift. But they will eventually lose their severe disability premiums, will end up significantly worse off on UC, £80 a week. There’s been zero extra help for those on legacy benefits.”

The Canary accuse Tories of creating “A two-tier welfare state,” saying “Here’s the thing. Sunak said before that the £20 uplift was for ‘low-income households’. So, his admission that the extra money was actually for ‘workers’ is revealing. Because it makes clear that the Tories still think sick and disabled people are ‘second-class citizens. As Rosina Cantaldo tweeted: ‘It’s blindingly obvious this government don’t give two shits about the economically inactive severe disabled. The decision to NOT uplift legacy benefits along with UC is clear evidence. Sunak even looked like he was relishing the refusal.”

But the Canary point out “this is not new. Entrenching a ‘human catastrophe’ In 2016, the UN accused successive UK, Tory-led governments and the DWP of ‘grave’ and ‘systematic’ violations of sick and disabled people’s human rights. The chair of the investigating committee went further. She accused them of creating a ‘human catastrophe’ for sick and disabled people. She also said the situation in the UK had become ‘life-threatening’ for many. Nothing has changed. In fact, Tory contempt for sick and disabled people is now entrenched. It was already violating their most basic human rights. And now, during a global crisis, it has made the ‘human catastrophe’ even worse. Sunak implying workers are more worthy of financial support than sick and disabled people is the thin end of the wedge. Over a decade of human rights abuses has led to this point.”

The ruthless Tory targeting of the disabled is the focus of another Canary Article entitled “DWP horror stories have come to light on Twitter” they expose the massive flaws in what is left of our denuded, chronically failing ‘Social Safety Net.’ They say that “A doctor shared his experience of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) on Twitter. But he may not have expected the response he got. Because it led to other professionals telling their horror stories of the UK’s social security system. Dr Adrian Heald is a specialist doctor and a vocal campaigner on the NHS and social issues. And he recently turned his attention to the DWP, which has hit the headlines throughout the pandemic. Not least because of the issue of the £20 a week Universal Credit uplift.”

“The Canary recently reported on chancellor Rishi Sunak’s comments about this. Sunak said that the uplift was designed for ‘workers’. So you could read his comment as meaning that him and the DWP think sick and disabled people are second class citizens.” They say “Judging by the story Heald shared, Sunak’s thinking is par for the course. Heald tweeted that: I remember calling the DWP as a patient had to come in due to an emergency, somebody without a medical degree told me ‘If he is well enough to go to the hospital and see a Dr, he is well enough to come in’ – my jaw dropped, I was outraged – Dr Adrian Heald (@DrAdrianHeald) Heald’s tweet seemed to hit home with a lot of people because others were sharing their stories.”

The Canary say that “Some people had supported claimants. Belinda Walker said: I had the misfortune of contacting DWP for a man who lost the ability to write following a stroke. They did not believe it possible and flatly contradicted me. I am Neuro Specialist Speech and Language Therapist with 26 years experience. She still insisted she knew more than me. Another person said: I have had DWP “assessors” question a patient’s diagnosis with absolutely no medical background at all. This was face to face with me supporting the patient because their PTSD was so bad. Claimants and their friends also shared their experiences. JEA Bell said:
I felt hounded back to work after a brain tumor. After my SSP [Statutory Sick Pay] finished, I had to deal with DWP, they were calling me at home, asking about my illness, it was awful. I’d never ever claimed benefits before, it was a horrible experience.”

The Canary report that “Andrea Jane said: People without medical degrees have told me that my many invisible illnesses don’t affect my life on a daily basis, I get fed up of applying for PIP and it getting rejected. Chris said: I know someone who had their benefits stopped as they had to wear a portable heart monitor for 48 hours, they canceled their DWP appt as doc told him he must rest during these 48 hours, DWP was 2 long bus rides away, sanctioned as doc’s advise was too vague. But, sadly, these stories are nothing new,” as they expose “Systemic problems.”

“The Canary wrote in 2017 about DWP sanctions. As it noted, examples of bad DWP decisions include: Sanctioning a man, living with learning difficulties, for not completing his job search on the computer. He hand-wrote it instead, because he did not have the IT skills to use the DWP system. Sanctioning a woman with mental health issues for missing a Jobcentre appointment. This was because her mental health prevented her from leaving the house on that day. Then there was the scandal of DWP staff asking people ‘why they hadn’t killed themselves. And there was the story of a benefit assessor asking someone when it was that they had ‘caught’ Down’s syndrome. Also, the DWP previously had to tell assessors not to ask claimants to show self-harm scars. DWP negligence and cruelty is nothing new. But it seems that after years of disastrous conduct, things have not got any better.”

In the Canary Article entitled “’Uber is not above the law’: MEP slams UK government over failure to protect gig economy workers” they say that a “Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Leïla Chaibi is ‘astonished’ that the UK government is no longer reviewing gig economy workers’ rights following the Supreme Court decision to classify drivers as workers. The French politician, a member of the European Parliament’s committee on employment and social affairs, said: Uber is not above the law and must respect Lord Leggatt’s judgment. The UK Government should now legislate and enforce the ruling made by the Supreme Court. It is important that the ruling is upheld in practice. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi is now panicking and has wrongfully claimed that it is not possible to hire drivers as workers on permanent contracts.” Sadly, the people of this country were tricked into abolishing the ‘interference from the EU when they voted for Brexit: so we begin that ‘Nantucket sleigh ride’ to the bottom!

The Canary explain that “Chaibi is a member of the democratic socialist La France Insoumise party. In November 2020, she submitted a draft proposal for a Directive on the legislation of gig economy workers across Europe. And the European Commission started consultations in February. However, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy scrapped a review on plans to cut critical rights and protections for workers. And there’s no mention of such a review by the Taskforce on Innovation, Growth and Regulatory Reform (TIGRR) either.”

The Canary report that “Andy McDonald, Labour’s shadow secretary of state for employment rights and protections, said: The Government must legislate to bring protection and security to all those in the gig economy. Uber should enforce the ruling of the Supreme Court and recognize that its drivers are workers rather than attempting to dodge the ruling by interpreting it in a way so that it applies to a tiny minority of its drivers, forcing other drivers to litigate for their rights. The government refused to answer Written Parliamentary Questions on whether the slashing of workers’ rights previously being considered by BEIS was within the scope of TIGGR to review.” The Tories have proven that they have no respect for UK or international law; criticism from the EU and the UN is ignored and our Judicial system is coming under attack. While we still have recourse to justice through our Courts, we must protest, challenge and scrutinize, to include demanding a robust Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election result.

The EU has progressive Socialist thinkers to champion workers’ rights, but they are unable to help our workers here in the UK now that we have officially left the block. Our only hope is that the EU might challenge the decimation of UK workers rights and the blatant exploitation for profiteering as an unfair trade advantage and threaten the rudimentary abysmal Brexit ‘deal’ they struck with us since the UK has already started unilaterally violating the terms that were agreed. The Canary say that “Chaibi ‘welcomes’ the ‘Recover and Rebuild: Power in the Workplace’ taskforce, which formed in February. Spearheaded by McDonald, the taskforce aims to shape a new deal for workers and develop Labour’s agenda on workplace rights. Chaibi is ‘optimistic’ about the European Commission’s proposal which should be available by the end of 2021. However, she’s skeptical of whether this will translate into legislation, citing the example of the corporate lobby in California paying “$200 million to cancel the AB5 law”.

Alarmingly the Canary report that “Uber has spent over 800k Euro on lobbying in Europe in 2019, and it’s held 71 meetings with the European Commission since 2014, most recently in January 2021. Meetings may have been held with lower-level staff, but such information is not published by the European Commission.” But Uber is far from the only ruthless exploiter in the UK’s rapidly expanding gig economy with more workers being switched onto Zero-hours contracts all the time. There are ominous new avenues opening up for the Tory elite to accelerate that lucrative race to the bottom; the latest trick unscrupulous employers are going for is ‘Fire and Rehire. Worse still the Tories much-touted ‘Freeports’ will create deregulated havens for worker exploitation and abuse. This will only continue if we passively accept each new injustice without protest. Reject the Fake News excuse about paying down a non-existent £300Bn debt: we must derail this Sovereign Tory Dictatorship ASAP or have their boot on our necks for decades!
DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Oh please don’t ‘Nix Nish!’ His satirical political mish-mash brings a glimmer of frivolity as we combat the wall to wall propaganda spewed out day after ay by the Tory mouthpiece that used to be our unbiased BBC public broadcaster. The Covid crisis has been grossly manipulated to provide the Tories with a daily PR spin Party Political broadcast, where there is no opposition right of reply, and awkward press questions are ignored or rebutted with more Government lies. The relief that Nish’s mish-mash provides is vital to our mental health. I’m not a big fan of bland English food, but I do love ‘bangers and mash:’ food of the proletariat! The Beeb now firmly under Tory control, they want to remove our progressive Socialist mish-mash to force-feed us more Tory type from old ‘bangers and bigots.’ As the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship course us into more austerity belt-tightening, we can do without this worthless fascist fodder. The Mash Report has a following, so don’t despair Nish, we must make space for you on ‘Socialist Telly!’

Mike Sivier coments in his Vox Political Article entitled “‘Left-wing’ Mash Report axed by BBC to make way for ‘new comedy’. It won’t be funny!” He calls out the BBC as “Blatantly Backing Conservatives”: I know this image refers specifically to BBC News. It seems with the arrival of ‘Tory Tim’ Davie, the Corporation’s right-wing bias is spreading to its comedy output. Look out, drama and documentaries! The BBC has axed Nish Kumar satire show The Mash Report on the grounds that it was biased toward the political left. Director General ‘Tory Tim’ Davie at first said he would not make big changes to the corporation’s comedy output, saying that comedy had always ‘poked at authority’. He seems to have changed his mind.”

Sivier says “Of course, ‘ory Tim’ is at a bit of a disadvantage when referring to political bias, since it is widely understood that he owes his position to Tory intervention. James O’Brien Tweeted: “The Mash Report, a comedy program critical of the government has been axed by the state broadcaster, reportedly for political reasons, and at the behest of a director general appointed by the government. Finally, a stone-cold example of what ‘cancel culture’ looks like.”

According to Sivier “Mash had been a target for right-wing commentators since 2018, when Andrew Neil singled it out while complaining that the corporation’s comedy output was too left-wing. Neil is, of course, chair of that ultra-right-wing publication The Spectator, so he’s a fine one to complain about bias! Asked for a comment on Twitter, Nish Kumar responded with this: A lot of people are asking me for a comment and here it is: ‘Boris Johnson is a Liar and a Racist’.” I am Listening Tweeted the reply: “Woke is good. There really is no culture war, just the Tory distract don’t act agenda. They hope to distract us from their world-beating worst death toll. The Tory regime like their freedom to speak but don’t think anyone else should have that right unless you agree with them.” They picture Boris Johnson as “The worst possible Prime Minister of the worst possible Government at the worst possible time” – adjacent to the book ‘George Orwell 1984!’ Was this something he wasn’t allowed to do on the televised show, and he was taking the opportunity now?”

Meanwhile, let’s have a look at the kind of bias supported by a show with similar ratings to The Mash Report. I refer to Question Time. This is an actual question from the March 11 edition: “Do the panel believe that NHS staff deserve more than a 1% pay rise when they have had secure jobs and incomes throughout the pandemic unlike so many others.” This was an “Audience Question” as posed by a Surgeon who was content to see NHS staff shafted again. I feel compelled to share a little Operating Theatre secret: When a Surgeon is rude, abusive or screams at OR staff, his Scrub Nurse or Surgical Tech can easily signal disapproval by adopting the ‘painful pass.’ Instead of placing the required instrument firmly into the Surgeon’s hand with a gently positive tap, it’s delivered with a painful whack that really smarts. No this isn’t done where it can put anyone at risk, but Surgeons soon learn to become team players and treat other staff with respect; I think this selfish, ‘I’m all right Jack’ Surgeon might regret his very public arrogance!

Returning to Sivier, he says “Do I need to spell out the wrongness of the question and the thinking behind it?” Few Question Time guests were in agreement and most revealed the very long hours staff have worked, overwhelmed by the abysmal support they got from the Government during this highly demanding situation. I think they should receive a decent pay rise of between 3.5 – 5% plus a one-off £1200 bonus towards a well-deserved family holiday. But, the Tory Minister was true to form, trying to reinforce the ‘can’t afford more – huge £300Bn debt to pay back’ lie at a time when this rabid Government wants to spring for an £80Bn Military spend! But where did the BBC manage to dredge up this freak Tory enabling Surgeon to diminish the sacrifice made by so many of his colleagues? He must hold a highly-paid and privileged position in a private healthcare facility, probably perfecting boob jobs for the rich and famous, where he might be spared the ‘painful pass’ treatment. Shame as it might have done him some good.

Sivier comments “This Writer certainly wishes Kumar, and co-presenter Rachel Parris, a brighter future beyond the Beeb. As for the corporation’s new comedy output: I look forward to seeing the new wave of diversity heralded by ‘Tory Tim’. Looking at comedy history, I think we’re about to be deluged with right-wing material that simply isn’t funny.” Sivier isn’t the only one to voice dismay as Joe Lo voices disgust in the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “Tory BBC boss axes satire show over criticism of the government.” Lo reminds us “The BBC Director-General is a former Tory council candidate,” saying that the “BBC Director-General and former Conservative Party activist Tim Davie has scrapped ‘The Mash Report’, reportedly because he thinks it criticised the government too much. The Sun reports that ‘sources close’ to Tim Davie told them the BBC’s satire needed a radical overhaul as it was too biased against the Tories and Brexit.”

Lo reports that “Davie was deputy chairman of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative Party in the 1990’s. Since then, he has remained friends with Stephen Greenhalgh, who was then a councillor and is now a government minister and ally of Boris Johnson from his Mayoral days. He was appointed BBC Director-General in June 2020 and there were soon reports that he would take on BBC comedy’s perceived left-wing bias. Publicly, he has dismissed these allegations as ‘nonsense’ and ‘ridiculous’. The Mash Report is fronted by comedian Nish Kumar, whose jokes are usually aimed at the government.” However. Lo points out that “It also features conservative commentator Geoff Norcott, whose segments took aim at targets like left-wing protestors, students, virtue-signalling brands and the Labour Party.”

Lo says that “While several comedians said this decision was an example of cancel culture, right-wingers celebrated the decision to axe the show. The decision raises fears that Frankie Boyle’s New World Order and Have I Got News for You could also be scrapped. A spokesperson for the BBC told The Sun: ‘We are very proud of The Mash Report but in order to make room for new comedy shows we sometimes have to make difficult decisions and it won’t be returning. We would like to thank all those involved in four brilliant series and hope to work with Nish Kumar, Rachel Parris and the team in the future’.” But can we still rescue ‘Antie’? The Canary Article entitled “BBC attempts to ‘modernise’ leads to all-white news board” delivers more bad news.

“As part of our #FactOfTheMatter series, The Canary can show that the BBC has appointed an all-white News Board. Director of news and current affairs Fran Unsworth appointed the new board as part of the BBCs plan to ‘modernise’ the organisation. Not only does this break the BBC‘s own policy on representing ethnic minorities, but the BBC won’t admit to any wrongdoing. In fact, it claims it’s not broken any policy because two are only ‘acting’ members. A source at BBC News sent The Canary the image below of the new board as they were concerned with its lack of diversity. We understand why” from the picture “Introducing the ‘modern’ BBC,” the new cast of characters is totally devoid of ethnic diversity.

The Canary report that “Unsworth has cut the number of board positions from 11 to eight, and in the process removed one of two BAME representatives at the time. Former editorial director Kamal Ahmed was made redundant in the restructure and as a result the board is not represented by anyone from communities of colour. Staff questioned whether ethnicity stopped their progression
The BBC‘s own report into its diversity found that not only was there a lack of representation of BAME employees, but that staff questioned whether their ethnicity was the reason they hadn’t progressed.”

The Canary say “The report found: The absence of a robust and targeted programme to track and progress high potential BAME talent across the business. A comprehensive and detailed leadership Development and training programme that fully supports the progression of BAME talent. An inconsistent approach across the BBC’s policy and procedures, which permits non-compliance, without compliance, action cannot be taken. Action needs to be taken to ensure greater accountability and to tackle perceptions of favouritism. Inconsistent approach to recruitment protocols which result in restricted pockets of excellence. In the absence of a consistent constructive and meaningful feedback system BAME employees are left questioning if their ethnicity is the real barrier to their progression.”

The Canary point out that “The BBC broke its own policy. When the report was published, nine recommendations were made, which the BBC said that it had accepted ‘unconditionally’. The report recommended that: By the end of 2020 the executive committee and divisional senior leadership teams should each have at least two BAME members. The BBC would introduce a policy that ensures shortlists for all jobs at band E and above to include at least one BAME person. Dramatically increase BAME representation across our interview panels backed by performance monitoring. All development and leadership programmes to have significant BAME representation as part of their overall cohort. Inclusive leadership should be added to part of all leadership programmes. Accountability for Diversity and Inclusion targets and BAME career progression should be incorporated into senior leadership team objectives and progression reviews. Progress should be outlined as part of future annual reports.”

According to the Canary other recommendations were to “Build a solid and sustainable BAME mid and senior leadership pipeline. As part of this, there should be developing programmes for candidates, backed by robust succession planning across the BBC. This should be in place by the end of the financial year. The Executive Committee should undertake a review of staff rotation to broaden the experience and knowledge base and explore what else can be done to make the BBC workforce more agile. Develop specific action plans based on further analysis of all divisions with less than 10% BAME representation or below par employee survey results including, Radio, Newsrooms, Newsgathering, English Regions and the World Service. Cultural awareness training should be compulsory for all team managers. This should be in addition to the current mandated Unconscious Bias training programme. The BBC should introduce a ‘Statement of Intent’ on Diversity and Inclusion. All staff would be required to abide by it. The statement should be published alongside the BBC’s Annual Report.”

The Canary say that “By appointing the new board, the BBC has broken its own policy, as it doesn’t have a minimum of two BAME members, or any for that matter. The Canary contacted the BBC for comment and received the following response: The final membership of the BBC News Board has not been announced. Two out of the eight posts, a quarter, are currently vacant. The ‘vacant’ positions the BBC is referring to are acting HR director Kirsty Lee and acting senior controller, news international services Mary Hockaday. The BBC has confirmed that they’re ‘acting’ members of the board but has not confirmed if it’s actively recruiting for these roles. Because of this, it’s not clear when the BBC will be able to finalise the News Board. Regardless of whether the board has ‘acting’ members is not the point. The point is that the BBC has not only failed to implement the recommendations from its own investigation but that in the process it’s cultivating an environment that its staff are concerned about.”

In the Canary Article entitled “Piers Morgan flounces off live broadcast after co-host calls out his Meghan Markle vendetta” the feature his childish conduct, but who is he trying to impress. They say “Piers Morgan stormed off the Good Morning Britain set this morning after presenter Alex Beresford criticised his comments about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry. Beresford was expressing his sympathy for the couple and the negative press they’ve endured. He said: ‘I think that we need to all take a step back and I understand that you don’t like Meghan Markle. You’ve made it so clear a number of times on this programme, a number of times. I understand that you’ve got a personal relationship with Meghan Markle, or had one, and she cut you off. She’s entitled to cut you off if she wants to. Has she said anything about you since she cut you off? I don’t think she has, but yet you continue to trash her.”

The Canary say “At this point, Piers got up and walked out of the studio, declaring himself ‘done with this’. Beresford, in disbelief, said: Do you know what, that’s pathetic… This is absolutely diabolical behaviour. I’m sorry, but Piers spouts off on a regular basis and we all have to sit there and listen. Six-thirty to seven o’clock yesterday was incredibly hard to watch. Morgan’s display provoked an immediate online reaction criticising his behaviour.” Chris Ship Tweeted: “So @alexberesfordTV defends Meghan on @gmb and criticises @piersmorgan for what he’d said about Meghan’s mental health. Piers walks off the set. Surely Piers knows if you give it, you gotta be able to take it? He never called you diabolical until you walked off like a petulant child and that’s when he called your behaviour and absolutely rightfully ‘diabolical’ because it was!” Ash Tweeted: “You are happy to sit there and spout off but when someone gives it you back… you run off in the corner!”

The Canary rightly point out that “Morgan has frequently criticised Markle since her engagement to Harry, to the point of some calling it an ‘obsession’. After the couple’s revealing interview with Oprah Winfrey aired, he continued the onslaught, saying: I expect all this vile destructive self-serving nonsense from Meghan Markle, but for Harry to let her take down his family and the Monarchy like this is shameful. Markle admitted in the interview that her treatment by the royal family had at points led to suicidal thoughts. She also said a member of the family asked how ‘dark’ her son Archie’s skin would be. Morgan later suggested on GMB that the question wasn’t racist, and was told by Trisha Goddard: ‘I’m sorry Piers, you don’t get to call out what is and isn’t racism against Black people. Call out all the other stuff you want, but leave the racism stuff to us’.”

Chris Rose Tweeted: “Regardless of your stance on Harry & Meghan, Piers Morgan who invites guests to sit there whilst he shouts over them, storming off the set after receiving a bit of criticism is pathetic.” Shaun Tweeted: “Piers Morgan walked off, just because he had to listen to the slightest scrutiny of his actions, but he also screams his head off because Harry & Meghan left the royal family after relentless abuse from the press & mistreatment from the family. Pathetic old Piers is at it again.” The Canary say that “Markle has also experienced constant criticism from the British press. The Daily Mail has already run several critical pieces about the interview. She recently won a privacy case against the Mail on Sunday and MailOnline after they published a letter she sent to her father. The constant targeted attacks on Markle by the UK media have been deemed racist by many, and Mogan’s obsession with her has only furthered this media climate.”

Laurie Beth Tweeted “I suppose that Piers Morgan doesn’t see the irony in him getting up and leaving a situation that he feels isn’t good for him” Dr Ebun Joseph Tweeted: “Privilege on display! @piersmorgan spends hours trashing Megan a young lady, whose only crime was to fall in love with Harry & he can’t take 30 secs of gentle rebuke! We don’t have the privilege of only hearing about race, deciding it’s ‘too much and ‘be done with this’. Shameful!!” This, in response to Chris Rickett who Tweeted: “Piers Morgan just walked off the Good Morning Britain set (!!!) after co-presenter Alex Beresford defended Harry and Meghan and condemned Piers’ treatment of them in yesterday’s programming.”

In a Canary Cartoon entitled “GMB leaks Piers Morgan replacement shortlist! The Image description says: This cartoon begins with the text title…” Then “Bellow that are the following list of names: Katie Hopkins; Jim Davidson; Nigel Farage; Tommy Robinson; The reanimated corpse of Enoch Powell. Each of the names has a caricature of that person beside it.” What conclusion should we draw from Morgan’s histrionics? To me it screamed major publicity stunt in the run-up to switching channels! It really isn’t hard to imagine where Morgan is heading next and his demonstrative exit was both a trailer and a very public audition for a more lucrative role on one of the two new far-right, Fox News style TV Channels. Morgan will want both new stations to vie for a slot featuring his controversial performances; he will go for the highest bidder, the BBC and ITV are not even close to satisfying is desire to spout abuse. Morgan needed to display his most hateful and cowardly credentials to beat out the competition lining up for unbridled far-right vitriol.

The reality is that we will have not just one, but two, hugely toxic TV News channels coming online very soon to pump out hateful rhetoric. They will stir-up more racial anti-migrant, anti-Roma, anti-ethnic diversity hate, plus increase the rampant disability and benefit discrimination, all to serve the far-right Tory ‘divide and conquer agenda that keeps the 99% subserviently impoverished, starving, homeless, destitute and in debt, desperately kept ‘in their place’ with the Tory boot of exploitation firmly stomping down on their necks! The Tory propaganda and Cunnungs’s weapons grade PsyOps were powerful enough to persuade the public that the progressive Socialist agenda of Labour was rejected in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election; we have yet to challenge and demand a full Investigation of that fake result. We need bold progressive Socialist Journalism and ‘Socialist Telly’ alternatives to debunk the Fake News of a £300Bn debt that only miraculously serves the interests of the wealthy elite. We must Get The Tories Out now! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

In India Protests are: Persistent, Peaceful and Pervasive as farmers fight to rescue their rural livelihoods from Corporate greed. In Hongkong Protesters risk Lengthy Lockups as they ingeniously evade capture with fluid gatherings in an effort to resist a Chinese Government crackdown on democracy. In Myanmar Protests are: Life Threatening as they try to overturn military dictatorship. In France Protests are routinely: Vocal, Vigorous and Violent. While I would never advocate such violence as I believe it negates any cause and permits authorities a justification for excessive use of force, we must reclaim our right to safely protest despite Covid restrictions. We cannot accept the eradication of our right to protest in the UK where Protest is now: Prohibited, Patroled, Prosecuted and ultimately Profiteering as, like all things Tory, it disproportionately plunders from the poorest and most desperate in society. A Nurse was just fined £10,000 for organizing a protest against the 1% pay insult and now the Police have blocked a vigil.

In the Morning Star Article entitled “We must all stand for women’s right to Reclaim These Streets,” they describe what I would call the thin end of the wedge in the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship’s prohibition on protest. They picture the outpouring of, “Flowers left by members of the public near to an area of woodland in Ashford in Kent where human remains were discovered which have been confirmed by Scotland yard as missing woman Sarah Everard.” We must condemn the fact that “Women from London to Edinburgh are being told to stay at home rather than attend Reclaim These Streets vigils in the wake of the murder of Sarah Everard. Though the advice is justified with reference to public health restrictions imposed because of the coronavirus pandemic, it smacks of cynical use of these powers to prevent public protest.” If toxic Home Secretary Priti Patel can wield her power over the police to shut down a vigil of grieving women then her battle to extinguish public dissent is won as few other protests are more deserving.

Reporting that “Scottish Health Secretary Jeanne Freeman asks that we light a candle or engage in social media in Everard’s memory, and says she will mark her own private vigil to remember the huge numbers of women who continue to lose their lives to male violence. There is a place for such observances.” But the Morning Star insists “they do not ‘reclaim these streets.” Our public spaces aren’t ‘reclaimed’ by prohibiting a public demonstration of grief! The Star note that “The thoughts of the country are on the appalling abduction and murder of a young woman, but alongside distress and compassion for Everard and her loved ones there is palpable anger. Women have already raised their voices, on social media and elsewhere, on living with the ever-present threat of male violence. On personal experiences of stalking, harassment, assault, on the oppressive and continuous need to exercise vigilance and practise avoidance strategies in a sometimes futile bid to stay safe while going about their daily lives.”

We are in danger of allowing this alt-right Tory cabal the power to strip women of other hard-won rights. The Morning Star point out that “Women should not have to live with this, let alone risk their lives because of it. Establishment and liberal narratives depict women’s oppression as a historical phenomenon, largely resolved by universal suffrage and equalities legislation. Where inequality is statistically undeniable (as with the gender pay gap), it is usually seen as a residual problem diminishing with time (though the gender pay gap is growing), or one that can be addressed by identifying and correcting for unconscious biases to ensure more women make it into the boardroom or the Cabinet. This picture fails to address the shocking scale of sexual harassment of women and girls and statistics indicating rising violence. A rise in domestic violence has been linked to the lockdowns over the past year, though the rise in ‘intimate partner homicides’ is, of course, a rise in men killing their partners, not women killing theirs.”

There is a marginalizing of women’s suffering, with fewer and fewer rape convictions, this violence against women is trivialized by minimizing the consequences. The Morning Star highlight “Lenient sentences such as the five years given to Anthony Williams last month for the deliberate killing of his wife Ruth in ‘an act of great violence’ condone a worldview in which men can ‘just snap’ and lash out with sustained, lethal violence, without afterwards being held fully responsible. But even before lockdown, schools were reporting sharp rises in child-on-child sexual assault, a trend almost certainly linked to universal access to online pornography. Women are right to ‘reclaim these streets’ to assert their right to be safe in public places, and to deliver this message publicly and collectively. They are right to deliver a wake-up call on the scale of the problem, the purpose of the ‘every woman you know…’ posts which have gone viral on social media in recent days, recounting universal experiences of dangerous male behaviour.”

The Morning Star note that “Like the killing of George Floyd last May, the killing of Sarah Everard, also, it seems, by a policeman, is simultaneously a human tragedy and a common event. The oppressed, as then, are standing up. Authorities cannot be allowed to hide behind Covid safety measures to prohibit this. Demonstrations should be socially distanced and masked, but as Reclaim These Streets organiser Anna Birley points out, the planned Clapham demonstration arranged for these precautions.” These Tory dictates are highly selective regarding safety. They say “A government which fails to heed scientific advice on school returns, that is still allowing employers to require staff to travel to non-essential work and failing to provide regular testing for those who have to go to work, is not afraid that political demonstrations will spread infection. As with its crackdown on the nurses’ pay protest whose organiser, a mental health nurse, was fined £10,000 in Manchester last week, it is afraid of defiance, resistance and revolt.”

In a previous post I wrote about the powerful impression reading Margaret Atwood’s book ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ had on me noting how a situation could be manipulated to facilitate misogynistic oppression. Referring to the plot I wrote “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?”

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “Jo Maugham QC: This dangerous new Conservative bill threatens the right to protest,” Jolyon Maugham, who is the Director of Good Law Project said “This week the government announced its intention to legislate the right to protest out of meaningful existence. Other than at a General Election, an event occurring at five-yearly intervals that hands unconstrained power to a Party that wins a majority, a citizen has but one way of registering dissent at what is done in their name: the right to protest. Yesterday the government announced its intention to legislate that right out of meaningful existence. The legislative proposal comes in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021. It grapples with everything from road traffic offences to confected culture war issues like the protection of war memorials. But it also contains provisions that should concern each and every one of us.”

QC Maugham points out that “High-profile protests around Brexit, the Black Lives Matter movement, and the climate crisis have been thorns in the government’s side over the last couple of years. By and large, these protests have been peaceful and have acted as effective ways for people to express their dissatisfaction with the government.” But, he says “The Home Secretary, in particular, doesn’t seem to like dissenting voices, nor does she want to engage with the root causes of these protests, preferring instead to brand protesters ‘so-called eco-crusaders turned criminals’ and to accuse them of ‘hooliganism and thuggery’. The government’s proposed solution? To clamp down hard on the right to protest. The Bill as it stands would give sweeping new powers to the police to restrict peaceful protests, including by giving them the powers to set conditions on the duration of protests, set maximum noise levels, and put restrictions on where protests can take place.” This is a blatant attempt to silencing dissent!

QC Maugham notes that “As it seems to us, the very purpose of the right to protest is to enable people to register their profound unhappiness or strength of feeling in a way which compels the State to respond. To legislate so that right cannot have any impact is to legislate it out of meaningful existence. The disproportionate measures proposed in the Bill also risk undermining the freedom of assembly and association protected under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act. But these aren’t our only concerns with the Bill. It also appears to attack the way of life of some of the most marginalised groups in our country, the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities, by criminalising trespass (which is ordinarily a civil issue).” This community has proven an easy first target for Fascist regimes in the past and we should not forget how many Roma were also exterminated in German concentration camps: “First they came for…” Look where that vile episode of European history ended!

In itself a truly disgusting comment since no form of racism is ‘respectable,’ Sir Trevor Phillips was quoted as calling “Racism against the GRT communities the ‘last ‘respectable’ form of racism’ when he was chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality back in 2004. But as the shocking example of Pontins recently showed us, not a lot has changed since. The government’s decision to villainise these communities by giving the police greater powers of enforcement is only likely to exacerbate the widening inequality experienced by them.” We must stop this enhanced level of ‘divide and conquer othering.’ QC Maugham warns “It should worry us all that the government has chosen to attack our rights and those of marginalised communities.’ We want to fully understand the human rights implications of this Bill, and have instructed an experienced QC and junior barrister from Matrix Chambers to provide us with written advice on this.” You are encouraged to support the Good Law Project’s work.

In the Morning Star Article entitled “Police given ‘green light’ to expand surveillance of protesters, campaigners warn,’ they note the expanding authoritarian restrictions. We should recognize such serious moves as classic signs of the increasing powers of this Tory Dictatorship. They say that “Police have given the ‘green light’ to expand surveillance powers against political and social movements, campaigners warned today. Forces could be encouraged to use undercover officers, as well as live facial recognition technology, to monitor protesters as part of plans published by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS). The report, which was ordered by Home Secretary Priti Patel last year, comes straight after the announcement of new legislation to crack down on protest.’ Police monitoring group Netpol warned that the HMICFRS report ‘offers the justification for an expansion of surveillance’ on the same campaigners targeted by the new Police, Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill.”

The Morning Star note that “The report outlines the ‘need to develop’ covert intelligence gathering methods, saying this is ‘particularly relevant if the police are to improve their focus on aggravated activists.’ It confirms that the term ‘domestic extremist’ has been replaced by ‘aggravated activist,’ which could apply to anyone who has a ‘negative impact upon community tensions’ or causes ‘an adverse economic impact to businesses.’ Netpol’s campaigns co-ordinator Kevin Blowe said: ‘Historically every campaign, from the suffragist movement to trade unions and equality campaigners, have involved actions that at the time were considered to be criminal or unlawful behaviour, but which led to the freedoms and rights we now cherish’. The HMICFRS has given the green light to target their modern-day equivalents.”

The Morning Star report that “Extinction Rebellion’s Alanna Byrne said: ‘Priti Patel can try and make the UK a protest-free zone, but it’s clear that the government is not going to do the right thing without protesters holding them to account. We don’t plan on stopping any time soon.’ HM Inspector of Constabulary spokesman Matt Parr said that police ‘too often’ fail to find the a balance between protecting the rights to protest and preventing disruption.” The latest Policing Bill will limit protests after the Covid crisis has passed, increased surveillance and the massive extension of powers authorized in the Spycops Bill will institutionalize nationwide Corporate oppression and securely maintain the authoritarian rule of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship for decades into the future.

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled “Labour plans to abstain on Tory bill to make ‘annoying’ protests punishable by 10 years in prison,” they expose the danger of Sir Keir Starmer’s cowardly zero opposition policy. They reveal that “Shadow Justice Secretary David Lammy informed MPs of leadership’s intention, but will Starmer cave after Clapham Common policing scandal? Labour is planning to abstain (again) on the Tories’ bill that will make ‘annoying’ someone by protesting a criminal offence punishable by up to ten years in prison. The bill is clear that mere ‘serious annoyance’ will become grounds for a prison sentence comparable with those for poisoning with intent to kill or cruelty to a child. In fact, such annoyance doesn’t need even to be caused. the sentence can apply if a ‘risk‘ of it is created: But David Lammy, Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, has told the party’s MPs that Keir Starmer intends to have them abstain when the bill is voted on in the Commons.”

The Skwawkbox remind us that “Starmer has already abstained on Tory bills to legalise murder and rape in the UK by undercover ‘intelligence sources’ and to legalise torture and other war crimes by UK forces overseas. Will he cave in after tonight’s shocking scenes of police manhandling women at a vigil for murdered victim Sarah Everard at Clapham Common and actually oppose for once? Or will he continue in his determination to avoid opposition at all costs? Labour back-bencher Jon Trickett has already announced that he will vote against the bill and other left MPs are expected to follow.” He Tweeted: “Unacceptable scenes tonight. Policing requires consent and understanding of the public mood. A number of us refused to vote with the whip in the #spycops bill for this very reason. I will vote against the Tory policing bill on Tuesday. It must be opposed.”

Howard Becket Tweeted: “I am hearing @Keir_Starmer is going to whip to abstain on a Bill that makes a nomadic life of Gypsies & Travellers unlawful. And allows the state Police to prevent protest for annoyance. You Sir have become part of the problem. Shame.” Skwawkbox warn that “The bill will also criminalise the Gypsy Roma Traveller lifestyle, as Unite’s Howard Beckett has pointed out.” The targeting of Roma is the thin end of the wedge as this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship tries to expand authoritarian repression in the UK. Gypsies have proven a far too easy target in the past; the Nazis rounded-up and exterminated them just as ruthlessly as they slaughtered the Jews: we said never again, but fascist targeting is embedded in this bill! The intention to target our Gypsy Roma communities was in that lethal Tory manifesto that we didn’t vote for in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. It is never too late to demand a full Investigation of that unfathomable result that miraculously gifted an unstoppable majority to this dangerous regime.

Skwawkbox report that “Other union leaders also led where Starmer seemingly will not, while Labour activists pointed out the nonsense of a ‘Labour’ leader siding with the oppressor.” Dave Ward Tweeted: “A woman was murdered 10 days ago. Today a serving police officer was charged with this sickening crime. Tonight, this is the image the met police has chosen to project to the world. Utterly shameful.” Alex Nuns Tweeted: “Labour is currently intending to abstain on this…” In response to a Tweet from Unite Politics who included a copy of alarming sections of the bill with the comment: “This is a section of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, ordered by @pritipatel following the BLM and XR demos last year. It comes to Parliament on Monday, and MPs will vote on it on Tuesday.” Alex Nunns concluded “… which I find ‘seriously annoying’.”

In the Skwawkbox Article entitled “BBC deletes appalling tweet blaming Clapham Common vigil for police violence,” they expose the purely preventable trauma that occurred on Saturday night. But they say “Not in time to prevent yet more Establishment shame being captured. The BBC has deleted a tweet it posted this evening blaming those holding a vigil for murdered London woman Sarah Everard for shocking scenes of police violence. The Corporation initially tweeted describing a ‘confrontation with police at ‘unsafe’ vigil;’ ‘confrontation’ being a common Establishment media term for one-sided violence by those they support, after police waded into people gathered at a peaceful protest remembering Ms Everard and protesting against violence against women.”

The BBC has now deleted the tweet after it provoked outrage, with one claiming that “Clashes break out between police and people attending a vigil for Sarah Everard in Clapham, London”, followed by another advising that “This tweet replaces an earlier tweet, which has been deleted following an update to the story’s headline“: In tragic irony, footage taken at the vigil included police aggression toward mourners as horrified women called out in protest: ‘Shame on you;’ ‘You’re meant to protect us’ and chanted ‘You are scum’!” Skwawkbox report that “Labour MP Jon Trickett was one of the most outspoken against the conduct of police, pointing as well to the government’s ‘spycops’ bill legitimising state-sponsored violence against members of the public, a bill passed in a vote in which Keir Starmer whipped Labour MPs to abstain’. The Reclaim These Streets group issued a statement condemning the police for ‘manhandling women’ and working against the vigil instead of working with organisers.”

Skwawkbox say “Shame on the BBC and all those complicit in tonight’s scandal.” It’s fitting that the push-back last night came from so many outraged women who will likely experience the brunt of increasing repression under the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. This was a vigil for a young woman allegedly murdered by a rogue cop. The organizers went to Court to try to overturn the blocking of what so easily could have been a well marshalled, Covid safe event. The Met’s refusal to cooperate and allow the vigil to go ahead safely led to an uncontrolled crowd with inappropriate police intervention. Cressida Dick made an abysmally poor decision and she should resign. But the real fault lies with Covid laws that, due to extensive vaccination decreasing risk at outdoor events, are resulting in restrictions being lifted for sports events, while the Tories want to retain special powers over public gatherings and protests. No logic supports the protest ban so we must reclaim the right to protest as we will need to protest on mass to Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Right before the Policing Bill comes to Parliament a critical flaw in police handling of a peaceful vigil points to future violent abuse. I have to admit that I’m not a fan of Labour Centrist Jess Phillips but, credit where credit is due, she certainly equipped herself well on Sunday. Generating the headline “In our current system ‘women don’t matter as much as cars,” her shocking statement made a mockery of the Policing Bill the Tories want to ram through Parliament in the coming week. Why the urgency one might wonder; surely there are far more urgent Government priorities? The Tory Sovereign Dictatorship are eager to enact new legislation that will put severe restrictions firmly in place before the Covid crisis is no longer available as an excuse for draconian policing. By the time Boris Johnson graciously allows the British people to hold hands again and enter the depleted number of pubs that have survived to reopen, he wants to have our ‘new normal’ under very strict authoritarian control with zero potential for public protest.

In the Labour List Article entitled “Sunday shows: Labour demands action on violence against women and girls,” Elliot Chappell and Sienna Rodgers document responses to police violence at the vigil. Starting with “The Andrew Marr Show where Jess Phillips, Labour’s shadow minister for domestic violence and safeguarding, said the police ‘got it wrong’ at Clapham Common on Saturday but did not call for Cressida Dick to resign. She explained Labour’s calls for longer minimum sentences for stalking and rape and for misogyny to be a hate crime. On whether the situation has improved since she started reading out the names of women killed by men every year: I wish that it had, but actually it’s got worse… It is this year at an all-time high,” she said. When asked “Whether the police ’got it right’ at Clapham Common on Saturday,” Phillips said, “No, I think the police got it wrong at every single turn.”

LaboUr List reported Phillips had insisted that it was “Not just the final image that we see, but all day yesterday and the day before the police did not try to find a way for a peaceful protest’. On whether Cressida Dick should resign,” Phillips had said “Ed Davey maybe wants a headline that I don’t want. I came here this morning to talk about violence against women and girls… I don’t think the police over the past few years have done enough to increase charging over domestic abuse, have done enough to increase charging in rape, both are reducing. This is not the day for me to say whether she should go.” Phillips was determined that the interview that morning would not descend into recriminations targeting Cressida Dick, detracting from the topic she wanted to focus on the violence against women and girls. With regard to the Covid legislation she had said that: “Within the legislation that has been nodded through, there was room for yesterday a peaceful vigil to take place.”

Philips was equally determined not to apportion blame when asked about “the upbringing of boys” Labour List noted that she had said “I’m not going to sit here and give mothers another reason to be bashed that they’re not bringing up their boys properly. But I think we’ve got a responsibility to look at the way we educate, the way all of society operates… It’s not all men, but it is all women’. She added that the government should ensure sex and relationship education is ‘robust’.” Asked about “Labour’s call for longer sentences for stalkers and rapists, they reported her shock headline response, “You should get more for rape than you do for defacing a statue… You can currently get more for fly-tipping than you can get for stalking.” They said “She added that Labour wants to see sentences doubled for stalking and the minimum sentence for rape extended from five years to seven years ‘at least’.”

Labour List said that “On Labour’s call for misogyny to be a hate crime, despite Dick and others saying it is not a priority for the public, Phillips had admitted, ‘Where I live, the public is genuinely more interested in bins than they are in domestic abuse’.” She added: “The reason misogyny should be a hate crime is that there was a man who stood for election in this country and one of the things he said on political platforms is whether he would or wouldn’t rape me.” For Jess Phillips that particular point had obviously become very personal. Moving on to other policy areas Phillips was asked about, “the pay rise Labour wants for NHS workers” It seems every interviewer wants to trap MPs into blurting out a specific figure, but most are too savvy to fall for it. They said Phillips had stuck to the agreed award as a baseline saying “At a minimum, it has to be 2.1%… There are many different unions involved in this, and they’re all asking for something different.” She added: “If it was down to me, I think nurses are worth the moon.”

Labour List reported that “On rewarding frontline workers” Phillips had made the important point that “By and large, the work done during the pandemic was done by women. I haven’t seen any policy come out of the government about the recovery that specifically targets the work of women. Nothing about childcare, which has been an absolute nightmare.” It was reassuring to hear a centrist Blareite like Phillips sticking up for the working poor and Labour’s core Socialist principals. The recent lurch to the right under Keir Starmer has been very alarming, leaving ordinary working people wondering if the Labour Party really represent them anymore. I thought this was the best interview I have ever heard from Jess Phillips, with stark comparisons that will resonate strongly with the general public and also be very hard for the Tories to out-gun in future debates in Parliament.

The Labour List team then reported on the Marr interview with Government Minister Victoria Atkins who to my mind did not equip herself nearly as well as Phillips. However, it was the policy decisions and dire inflexibility of her Tory PM Boris Johnson, in his shambolic mishandling of Covid, that ultimately led to the debacle at the vigil on Saturday. Her comments came across as weak and mealy-mouthed; Labour List noted that she had “said she found the police approach to Clapham Common yesterday ‘very upsetting’ although ‘the overwhelming majority of people who did go there had a peaceful experience’.” I felt she had seemed eager to make excuses for the police action. They said that “Asked whether the leadership of the Metropolitan Police is in question now, the safeguarding minister replied that ‘we ought to take this a step at a time’, neither calling for Dick’s resignation nor defending the Commissioner.”

Labour List noted how leaping on the typical Tory ‘kick, the can down the road’ merry-go-round “She highlighted that Home Secretary Priti Patel had asked for a report on the events of Saturday evening, and said: ‘There is good work going on in policing but we must look at what happened last night.” It was very non-commital, another of the Tory endless stream of reports with recommendations that we can guarantee will be totally ignored; this is the signature practice of our current zero accountability Tory Government: just ignore the mistakes and move on why not. We are likely to see this level of police violence become the norm as police powers are increased while scrutiny and accountability are scaled back with new legislation used to justify increasing use of excessive force.

The Labour List team turned to ITV’s interviews captured on Sunday morning’s Sophy Ridge show where once again Jess Phillips made a strong showing maintaining a laser-like focus on important points and urging action over procrastination. They noted that “Jess Phillips demanded that the government take action on violence against women and girls, and criticised the police handling of a vigil for Sarah Everard on Saturday evening. Asked whether Priti Patel reopening a survey on violence against women and girls is ‘enough’,” they quoted Phillips saying “We know what the problems are. The Home Secretary has known for many years… We don’t need a survey, we can take action.” Labour List say when asked about police conduct she had told Ridge “The mistake, if we’re talking about the vigil specifically or that the police generally need to be doing more in cases of violence against women and girls, I’m afraid to say that both are true.”

Labour List reported that re the vigil Phillips had said: “There were, oh gosh, so many missed opportunities throughout the day for the police to work with organisers to create a completely safe vigil so that people could have a moment of sorrow and a moment of resistance’.” They reported on Phillip’s response to the police’s actions quoting her claim that “There are brilliant police officers working… across the country who spend all their time trying to make it so that women feel confident to come forward, and yesterday the police undermined that.” Again “Asked whether Cressida Dick should go” They said Phillips had remarked “If Cressida Dick stays or goes doesn’t make women in this country more safe, and that’s what I want to talk about. We need to come together to take action.” It was an important point as it would be all too easy for the Government who have created this policing mess to target Cressida Dick as a scapegoat to hide the ambiguity in their ill-conceived rules.

Labour List reported Phillips’s response to Ridge’s questions “On action from the government,” to which the reply had been “‘The minister should be able to lay out to us exactly what they’re going to do. The Labour Party has come up with endless suggestions throughout the domestic abuse bill. 37 amendments we put down.’ On upcoming legislation” Phillips had said, “On Monday, we will again be asking the government to look at things like misogyny as a hate crime, street harassment as a crime and increasing the tariffs on rape.” Ridge had asked about Domestic Violence Funding and this had provided an opportunity for Phillips to expose where a serious shortfall still remained when she replied “The £90m allocated in the Budget was largely to go into perpetrators services, which is absolutely something that we should be looking at. Only £4m of it was for directly for victims.”

Labour List say that when asked about Government policy Phillips had said “We’ve got to get this right in education, we’ve got to get this right in health, we’ve got to get this right in welfare, we’ve got to get this right in housing and we’ve got to get this right in criminal justice.” It was heartwarming to hear Phillips, from the Labour right, championing Socialist issues and acknowledging that there are consequences to the grinding poverty in many parts of this country. Labour certainly should emphasize that the rampant inequality caused by a decade of Tory austerity has been a major contributing factor to many social ills. We do not need Labour to buy into the neoliberal £300Bn debt con-trick and endorse another round of swinging cuts targeting the working poor. They noted She added: “Because in every single metric we are failing and in every metric woman are getting less safe year-on-year if you look at the data for convictions and if you look at the number of women coming forward.”

Labour List report that “Asked whether there can now be real change: ‘I really hope so. As somebody who has been ploughing this furrow for my entire career, not just my entire political career, I really, really, really hope that this is the turning point.’ On the Me Too movement,” they noted Phillips had pointed out that “Not a single piece of legislation has changed in the United Kingdom that would protect people from being sexually harassed at work that didn’t already exist. Every recommendation that has been made to the government on women’s safety in the workplace since the Me Too movement, which we all thought was a moment, has been rejected by the government out of hand.” When asked about “Taking action now” Phillips had said of the Tories: “They have an enormous majority in the Commons… I don’t want platitudes; I don’t want nice words; I don’t want clapping; I don’t even want candles. I want action.” It was another strong performance by Jess Phillips and her work on this issue is greatly appreciated.

Labour List then reported on the interview with Hackney North and Stoke Newington Labour MP Diane Abbott who said “Cressida Dick has ‘questions to answer over police conduct on Saturday. The former Shadow Home Secretary called for the media to take violence against women and girls seriously. Asked whether Cressida Dick should go: “We would hope that if she goes that she’s actually replaced with somebody better. Someone that doesn’t deny institutional racism exists in the police force and someone with a much less heavy-handed approach.” On Saturday’s events: “It was Cressida Dick and people at Scotland Yard who insisted on banning it altogether when everybody knew people would turn up anyway. So, she does have questions to answer.” This point is certainly true, but the problem was ultimately caused by the Tory Government’s manoeuvres to use Covid restrictions to shut down public protest altogether and it will only get worse if the Policing Bill sails through Parliament unchecked.

Labour List say that Abbott was asked “Whether harassment towards women has worsened and she had said that “In some ways, it’s got worse because what you’ve got is the online world, which feeds hostility and violence against women.” Asked “Whether politicians can change things, especially given the Me Too movement involving abuse in Westminster,” Abbott had replied, “When you want to see substantive change in society, the political process is part of that.” They noted that regarding “The media and violence against women,” Abbott had said “In the past, it hasn’t necessarily been seen as news by the media. We need a change in culture. We need the media to take these things seriously, not when there’s one dramatic case.” No one in Parliament has ever been on the receiving end of more hateful and violent abuse than Diane Abbott so few can speak with more authority on this issue.

Labour List report that “Home Office minister Victoria Atkins also appeared on the show this morning. She described the scenes at the vigil in Clapham on Saturday evening as ‘very upsetting’ and said that she takes it ‘very seriously.” Just like on Andrew Marr her appearance seemed limp and carefully scripted to meet the standard noncommital Tory procrastination agenda. They said that “The parliamentary under-secretary of state for safeguarding told viewers that an ‘end-to-end review of the criminal justice system is taking place and that changes are being made to the sentencing of serious and violent offenders. Asked whether Cressida Dick should go, Atkins said: “I really, really want to support the Home Secretary in her request to have a report from Cressida. The police have got a tough job in policing the coronavirus pandemic at the moment.” The public will not feel any more reassured by what Atkins had to say as the ‘cover-up and carry on’ brigade are not interested in tackling any of the real issues of the day.

In the Labour List Article entitled “Labour set to vote against ‘poorly thought-out’ Priti Patel policing bill,” Sienna Rodgers reports on this vital change of heart that took intense pressure from the progressive Left to derail yet another vacuous abstention from Keir Starmer. The opposition needs too apose, especially on toxic pieces of legislation like this, but Starmer’s relentless targeting of the Left Labour and his chronically weak leadership continues to let us all down. Finally, Rogers notes “Labour has announced that it will vote against the ‘poorly thought-out’ police, crime, sentencing and courts bill that could lead to harsher penalties for damaging a statue than for attacking a woman.” Sadly, it appears to have taken the massive groundswell of public opinion rather than respect for the views of other Labour MPs to get Starmer to take a stand: this is not strong, decisive leadership and robust opposition!

Rogers says that “David Lammy confirmed on Sunday morning that Labour would oppose the bill in parliament. The party has called on the government to drop the proposals and instead legislate to tackle violence against women. The Shadow Justice Secretary said: ‘The tragic death of Sarah Everard has instigated a national demand for action to tackle violence against women. This is no time to be rushing through poorly thought-out measures to impose disproportionate controls on free expression and the right to protest’. LabourList sources say the Labour leadership was originally prepared to abstain on the government legislation, although MPs including Richard Burgon and Jon Trickett had already said they would vote against it. The whipping arrangement plans appear to have changed after the Metropolitan Police faced criticism from across the political spectrum over its handling of a vigil in south London for Sarah Everard, who went missing on March 3rd.”

Rogers reported that “It was confirmed this weekend that remains found in an area of woodland in Ashford, Kent were Everard’s. A serving police officer is in custody and was charged on Saturday with her kidnap and murder. Lammy added: ‘Now is the time to unite the country and put in place on long-overdue protections for women against unacceptable violence, including action against domestic homicides, rape and street harassment. And we must tackle the misogynistic attitudes that underpin the abuse women face. Instead, the Conservatives have brought forward a bill that is seeking to divide the country. It is a mess, which could lead to harsher penalties for damaging a statue than for attacking a woman. Labour will be voting against the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill on this basis. ‘We are calling on the government to drop its poorly thought-out proposals and instead work with Labour to legislate to tackle violence against women, which is forcing so many across the country to live in fear.”

Rogers says that “Labour is demanding ‘tougher sentences for attacks on frontline workers and increased sentences for terrorists’, as well as longer minimum sentences for stalking and rape, and that misogyny be made a hate crime. The opposition would like to see a whole life tariff introduced for anyone found guilty of a stranger abductor murder, a new street harassment law and an independent review to look into increasing sentences for domestic murder. Shadow safeguarding minister Jess Phillips told The Andrew Marr Show: ‘You should get more for rape than you do for defacing a statue… You can currently get more for fly-tipping than you can get for stalking.’ The opposition party backs proposals in the bill on dangerous driving increased sentences for terrorists and other dangerous offenders, a police covenant, reform to criminal records and criminalising sexual abuse by people in positions of trust.”

But Rogers warns that “The government legislation also gives the police powers to take a ‘more proactive approach in cracking down on protests that are considered to be ‘highly disruptive’, such as those by Extinction Rebellion. Civil rights organisations have criticised the proposals on the basis that they threaten freedoms. Liberty director Gracie Bradley said parts of the bill will ‘facilitate discrimination and undermine protest’. The bill states, in a section on ‘intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance’, that someone could face a fine and up to ten years in jail for causing ‘serious annoyance’ or ‘serious inconvenience’ to another person.” This Policing Bill seeks to protect powerful Corporations and rogue Government decision-makers in the rampant exploitation of our people and our planet by criminalizing all reasonable public protest and civil disobedience in a sharp authoritarian crackdown.

Rogers reports that “The Sarah Everard vigil organised by Reclaim These Streets was cancelled after the Met said it could not go ahead due to Covid. Many, including the Duchess of Cambridge Kate Middleton nonetheless attended. Hundreds gathered on Clapham Common on Saturday evening. Police officers were shown in videos and photos circulated online to have started forcefully removing women from the area once it was dark. Reclaim These Streets had originally told attendees to wear masks and to be socially distanced and said they made suggestions to the police including staggered start times and splitting the event into time slots. The organisers of the vigil released a statement on Saturday morning saying there were ‘positive discussions’ with local officers but ‘those from Scotland Yard would not engage with our suggestions’.” Probably the decision went as high as Priti Patel, determined to stop this vigil as, in anticipation of many protests in the near future, they want to totally shut down all public protests!

Following the shocking unfathomable result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election that gifted absolute power to this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship, the Covid 19 Pandemic has provided cover for the implementation of draconian restrictions that this corrupt cabal are eager to retain. As the catastrophic self-harm of Brexit becomes more apparent despite the impact being blamed on Covid we must protest. Drafting in the Army to deal with civil unrest was already in the Yellowhammer planning document long before Covid and this Government will not hesitate to resort to excessive use of force. At this time when the progressive Socialist fight-back has never been more vital, we cannot condone any of the current legislation that will provide legal cover for violence against civilians. We should never have let the vote that brought this dangerous Government to power stand unchallenged, but a full Investigation is still possible. Just a year in power and the squandering of public money has added to their rampant corruption: Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

We should take note of the enormous sacrifices protestors are making all over the world to demand equality, end exploitation secure basic freedoms and overthrow authoritarian regimes even if it requires risking their lives. If we abandon our right to protest because this corrupt Tory Government has simply ordered us not to protest, we should hang our heads in shame. Protest has never been more vital to restoring our shattered democracy than right now. In the Morning Star Article entitled “Editorial: We must defeat this shockingly authoritarian Policing Bill,” they say that “Unions, campaign groups and charities are sounding the alarm over the shockingly authoritarian new policing Bill. Even senior police officers are speaking out over the dangerous implications of legislation that grants sweeping powers to the police to ‘act unilaterally with near-unlimited discretion,’ as a statement issued by scores of local Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion (XR) and other grassroots campaign organisations puts it.”

The Morning Star say that “The government makes no bones about the fact that this legislationis designed to criminalise particular forms of public protest, particularly the mass actions mounted by XR in 2018-19. Labour’s Diane Abbott points out that not only do the police have extensive powers to close down protests already but they are clearly abusing these, as we saw in the violent attack on women holding a peaceful vigil for murder victim Sarah Everard in Clapham at the weekend. The arrogance and brutality of the Metropolitan Police has brought far greater numbers out in public protests since, with Parliament Square heaving on Sunday and today. It has also prompted Labour to do the right thing and announce it will vote against the Bill, dropping a previous position of abstention. In reminding the opposition what its job is, the courageous women who went to Clapham Common on Saturday demonstrate the importance of public protest.” The police conduct at the vigil was an ominous glimps of the Tories ‘new normal!’

According to the Morning Star “The Home Office denies that our right to such protest is at risk: ‘The majority of protests … will be unaffected by these changes.’ But the very vagueness of the legislation makes that impossible to guarantee. Its provisions on ‘intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance’ allow huge leeway to police officers and the Crown Prosecution Service in deciding what constitutes ‘serious harm’ to ‘the public or a section of the public.’ Such harm can consist of causing ‘serious annoyance [or] serious inconvenience,’ and can land you in prison for up to 10 years. Sections dealing with ‘one-person protests’ leave it to the discretion of a senior police officer whether the noise you are making risks causing ‘serious unease’ in those who hear it. If so, it’s illegal. Shadow justice secretary David Lammy says the Bill is ‘poorly thought out.’ But this suggests Labour’s front bench has either yet to wake up to what the government is up to, or, more worryingly, has no fundamental objection to it.”

The Morning Star insist that “The policing Bill is not some aberration. It has in common with last year’s spycops Bill, one Labour also had trouble opposing, the goal of facilitating the arbitrary exercise of power by state agents. Under this legislation protesters can be arrested and charged on grounds so vague that they are almost impossible to refute. Because of the spycops Bill a wide range of government bodies, including police forces but extending to the Department of Health, the Gambling Commission and others, can pre-authorise crimes, any kind of crime, there are no exceptions, even for murder. The only criterion they have to meet is whether, in their own judgement, the crime is necessary to deliver outcomes that are again defined in the loosest possible terms, including ‘to prevent disorder’ or to maintain ‘economic wellbeing.’ There is a clear direction of travel here: the British state is rapidly acquiring huge powers over citizens, and security agencies are being empowered to act as they please.”

The Morning Star warn that “If the Bill cannot be defeated in Parliament, and the Tories’ large majority makes this unlikely. its repeal must become the cause of a new wave of mass campaigning. We have seen far too much abuse by state agents already, from undercover cops deceiving women into sexual relationships to police collusion in the illegal blacklisting of trade unionists. Our rights are under attack, but the left’s response has been piecemeal, criticising some authoritarian laws while endorsing others, failing to orient ourselves consistently as a democratic movement opposed to concentrating power in the hands of the capitalist state. That needs to change.” Sadly the Labour Party’s inconsistent and feeble opposition is being held hostage by Sir Keir Starmer the Tories loyal Trojan horse dedicated to tearing apart the progressive Socialist left: Starmer has to go ASAP!

In the Labour List Article entitled “Why Labour is right to oppose the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill,” Russell Fraser quotes a judge who insists that “’Rights worth having are unruly things. Demonstrations and protests are liable to be a nuisance. They are liable to be inconvenient and tiresome, or at least perceived as such by others who are out of sympathy with them’. These were the words of one judge in a case concerning the Aldermaston Women’s Peace Camp, set up in the vicinity of an atomic weapons facility. Keir Starmer knows as well as anyone that protest rights are rights worth having. As his leadership campaign video emphasised, during his career he represented many people making a stand against the injustices of the day and seeking to vindicate their rights to assembly and free expression.” Labour members who were swayed by Starmer’s presentation are now horrified by his abstention and lack of opposition on the Spycops Bill with early indications of yet another abstention.

Fraser warns that “Those rights are once again under attack in the form of the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill. The most pernicious aspects of the proposals would target activists across our movement, and David Lammy’s confirmation that the Labour Party will vote against the bill this week is both welcome and right.” Sadly it took significant push-back from the public before Sir Keir clambered down off the fence in response to public outcry; this cowardly indecision was not a good look and it will further damage public confidence in the Labour Party as Starmer continues to insidiously hollow out the progressive left. Fraser points out that “The Home Secretary, Priti Patel, has not disguised her contempt for the Black Lives Matter and Extinction Rebellion movements. The only surprise in the new bill is that those groups are not actually mentioned by name.”

Fraser refutes claims that “the changes are necessary because of protest tactics like people glueing themselves to buildings or blocking roads to an organisation. In fact, those tactics are far from novel, and I have represented countless people charged with offences arising from exactly such conduct. There is no gap in the law as the bill’s explanatory note claims. The police currently enjoy a wide range of powers to control and restrict protest. Organisers of a planned march must notify the police in advance; police can seek the consent of the Home Secretary to prohibit a march if they fear it will lead to serious disorder; and they can impose conditions on demonstrations if they reasonably believe that it may result in ‘serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community. If there are gaps in the current law it has not prevented thousands of people participating in Extinction Rebellion and Black Lives Matter protests being arrested and prosecuted.”

According to Fraser “Priti Patel wants to lower those legal tests to make it easier for curbs to be imposed on protests. It would mean that noisy protests that may result in the ‘intimidation or harassment’ of bystanders or cause them ‘serious unease, alarm or distress’ can be curtailed, even where no such effect is intended by the participants. The bill also hands the Home Secretary the power to later define what terms like ‘serious unease’ mean for the purposes of these offences. This removes parliament from the debate entirely: if that term and expressions like ‘serious disruption’ are to be defined, then it should be done by parliament, not on the whim of a Home Secretary. At present, after conditions are imposed on a static protest, it is an offence to knowingly fail to comply with any such requirement. Under these new government proposals, it will be an offence if a participant fails to comply with any condition that ‘they ought to have known; was in place.” Bear in mind, Patel is a particularly cruel and vicious Home Secretary.

Reminding us of the amazing persistence and determination of the most successfully prolific ‘Stop Brexit’ protester Fraser points out that “There is even a section that will surely become known as the ‘Steve Bray clause’: a provision aimed at ‘one-person protests’. While the targets of this bill are undoubtedly obvious, the wider effect of the bill is equally clear. There is no reason why the sorts of marches and rallies frequently organised by the TUC could not infringe this legislation and it would be wrong to assume that it could never happen.” In reality the wording is so ridiculously open-ended that it could be easily interpreted to prevent strike action as a Union organized strike by its very nature is designed to cause ‘serious disruption’ to business, deprive the public of a service and have a negative financial impact on the employer which could potentially render most strike action illegal under this law!

This is a very slippery slope on our race to the bottom and the imposition of authoritarian rule to secure even greater exploitation of the working poor under the Tory elite. Fraser says that “Marches from Embankment to Hyde Park are always lively, colourful and boisterous, filled with chanting and music precisely in order to attract attention to the issue or cause. In another case in which Starmer himself appeared on behalf of anti-war protesters, a judge noted that ‘civil disobedience has a long and honourable history in this country’. The police, crime, sentencing and courts bill is a nakedly political attack not just on that history, but on some of the most well-supported and popular causes of the day. They are causes that are typically most enthusiastically supported in our movement and across the wider left. Our party is right to side with those concerned with climate and racial justice, and not with an increasingly authoritarian Home Secretary who thinks nothing of vilifying desperate migrants and lawyers who represent them.”

The Labour opposition is failing us just when we need them to provide robust scrutiny. In the London Economic Article entitled “The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is rubbish. So is Labour’s response,” Henry Goodwin criticizes Starmer’s pathetically late call for united Labour opposition. He says that “After a weekend in which British policing was thrust into the spotlight, a remarkable twist of fate sees the government’s new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill receive its second reading in the Commons today. Even before the Metropolitan Police’s disastrous display of force on Clapham Common on Saturday night, civil liberties campaigners warned that the bill represented a ‘staggering assault’ on the right to protest. Human rights barrister Adam Wagner, of Doughty Street chambers, Keir Starmer’s former parish, said the legislation “would effectively put the current situation where Covid regulations have given police too much power over our free speech rights on a permanent footing.”

Goodwin warns that “The bill will ‘hugely expand’ police powers to stop protests which cause ‘serious unease’ and create criminal penalties for people causing ‘serious annoyance’. Events of the past few days ‘have shown beyond doubt that the police cannot be trusted to protect free speech rights,’ Wagner said. ‘Well, it’s about to get worse’. So it’s good, you might say, that Labour, which, in a vintage bit of Starmerism, had planned to abstain, will now vote against (it’s still very likely to pass). David Lammy, the shadow justice secretary, said the bill would impose ‘disproportionate controls on free expression and the right to protest,” which makes you wonder whether he found it ‘disproportionate’ before Starmer’s U-turn. Labour MPs are at pains to point out that, in the 296-page bill, ‘women’ are not mentioned once, but ‘monuments’ are cited frequently. It is undoubtedly true that the legislation is wholly inadequate for tackling violence against women. But so is what Labour is proposing in its place.”

Goodwin reports that “Lammy called for increased minimum sentences for rapists and stalkers, as well as the introduction of life sentences for crimes like abduction, sexual assault and murder. In short, the same old tough-on-crime, law-and-order rhetoric as ever. Tougher sentencing, the logic goes, acts as a deterrent to potential criminals, and therefore makes a man less likely to assault a woman because he’s scared of spending decades behind bars. But there’s scant evidence that it actually works, the government’s own minister responsible for sentencing admitted last week that there is minimal proof that longer sentences cut crime. It’s not even especially popular with voters; fewer than one-in-ten people think locking more people up is the best way to deal with crime. Nor does it do anything to address the root causes of offending.”

Goodwin points out that “Women who gathered across the country to mourn Sarah Everard on Saturday night weren’t just doing so because of the horrific circumstances of her disappearance and death. They were doing so because Sarah’s fate represented the extreme end of something they had all experienced: a society in which men habitually harass, assault and abuse women with impunity. Sending rapists to prison for 20 years instead of 10 will do very little to tackle the systemic issues which created that culture in the first place. Angela Davis, the veteran civil rights campaigner, wrote that the ideological function of a prison is as an ‘abstract site’ into which ‘undesirables are deposited’. Touting incarceration as the answer to complex societal issues is essential ‘out of sight, out of mind’ wrought physical, so long as we’re locking up more criminals for longer, we’re absolved of dealing with why they became criminals in the first place. It’s like sticking a plaster on a gaping wound.”

So how does Boris Johnson and his ruthless authoritarian Government respond? In the London Economic Article entitled “Plain-clothes police will patrol bars and clubs ‘to keep women safe’,” but according to Henry Goodwin “The proposal was met with an instant online backlash, with many saying the police should not be given ‘extra powers.’ He says the proposal would have ‘Plain-clothes police officers will patrol bars and clubs as part of plans to keep women safe from ‘predatory’ offenders. Following a meeting of the government’s Crime and Justice Taskforce chaired by Boris Johnson, Downing Street said it was taking a series of ‘immediate steps’ to improve security. Among them is to roll-out across the country pilots of a programme where uniformed and plainclothes officers seek to actively identify predatory and suspicious offenders in the night-time economy.”

Goodwin reports that “Dubbed ‘Project Vigilant’, the programme can involve officers attending areas around clubs and bars undercover, along with increased police patrols as people leave at closing time. Pilot schemes will run across the country, with more patrols to ‘identify predatory and suspicious offenders’. A fund to provide other deterrents, like better lighting and CCTV, will be doubled to £45 million. The prime minister said that Everard’s death has ‘unleashed a wave of feeling about women not feeling safe’, adding: ‘We must drive out violence against women and girls and make every part of the criminal justice system work to better protect and defend them’.” This sounds like ‘Big Brother on Steroids’ or perhaps a few pints would be necessary to avoid blowing police cover. No end of useful surveillance information could be gleaned snooping on relaxed punters drinking at nightspots; it would function as an open-ended fishing expedition for more intensive Spycops targeting.

Goodwin says that “The meeting took place as demonstrators again took to the streets of central London to protest at the policing of a vigil for Everard on Saturday. There were a number of arrests after the police ordered the protesters to disperse, warning they were in breach of coronavirus regulations. Earlier Johnson backed Metropolitan Police chief Dame Cressida Dick following calls for her resignation in the wake of the weekend’s events on Clapham Common where crowds gathered to remember the 33-year-old marketing executive. Serving Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens, 48, has been charged with her kidnapping and murder. Johnson acknowledged that the scenes, when a number of women were arrested, had been ‘distressing’ but said the police had a ‘very, very difficult job’ to do.”

Goodwin reports that Johnson “Said that Sir Thomas Winsor, chief inspector of constabulary, would be carrying out a review into the way the event was policed. ‘I think people have got to have confidence in the police and Tom’s going to look at that,’ the prime minister said. However, proposals to place plain-clothed police officers in bars and nightclubs was met with hostility online, with one commentator suggesting that it was… ‘lions will patrol antelope enclosures to prevent hyena attacks’.” Well put! Eleanor Penny responded by Tweeting: “The key to a good night out is undercover state agents with complete impunity and an institutional history of murderous violence and sexual abuse rocking up to the club fresh off kicking the shit out of protesters.”

According to Goodwin “Dr Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union, said: ‘This is a cynical attempt to shift attention from the matter at hand. Undercover police have total immunity if they commit abuse while infiltrating criminal gangs, despite reality that many of the victims of abuse have been women. The police do not need extra powers.’ Others pointed out that the policy was a perverse response to the alleged killing of a woman by a police officer.” Talia Lavin Tweeted: “this seems like a really weird reaction to a woman being murdered by a police officer.” Some suggested the move would ‘kill the nightlife industry’.” Jason Okundaye Tweeted: “This must be a ploy to kill the nightlife industry because if they put plain-clothed officers in the clubs I’m not going ever again. It’s not me who’s getting murdered on the dance floor.”

Goodwin reported that “In a Commons statement on Monday, Home Secretary Priti Patel said ‘too many’ women felt unsafe in public. ‘Too many of us have walked home from school or work alone, only to hear footsteps uncomfortably close behind us,’ she said. ‘Too many of us have pretended to be on the phone to a friend to scare someone off. Too many of us have clutched our keys in our fist in case we need to defend ourselves and that is not OK.’ She said footage of the Clapham Common event, where four protestors, were arrested had been ‘upsetting’.” But he said “She defended restrictions on protests put in place to curb the spread of coronavirus, urging people not to participate in large gatherings while they remained in force. ‘The right to protest is the cornerstone of our democracy, but the Government’s duty remains to prevent more lives being lost during this pandemic,’ she said.” Despite the fact that our vaccination program is reducing Covid risk the Tories will hang onto this excuse as long as they can.

Few Brits can imagine how anything might ‘upset’ ‘Ice Pick’ Patel as she certainly doesn’t show one once of empathy for those on whom she inflicts untold suffering. As.one of the most cruel and heartless Tory MPs, the current Home Secretary is the perfect ruthless Minister to aggressively advance authoritarian objectives as Boris Johnson seeks to solidify his Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. Like the Spycops Bill and other pieces of excessively toxic legislation this Policing Bill is being rammed through Parliament right now because the British people are too distracted by the treat of Covid to take to the streets on mass to protest the rampant corruption of this Government or demand a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election result and Covid has provided an excuse to massively restrict our freedoms. But if we do not wake up from this daze of complacent apparently very soon and derail this fascist takeover it will take decades before there is any possibility to remove this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship from office: they must go ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

At a critical moment when our democracy is under the most horrendous Fascist authoritarian assault there was a truly shocking Media blackout where the headlines continued a tireless distraction of the public with obsessive ‘Royal Handyfloss.’ In the London Economic Article entitled “The government just voted to curtail our ability to protest, and the papers have ignored it,” Jack Peat warns that we should be very seriously alarmed. He says that “The scariest part about living under Orban was ‘when the silence came. The newspapers stopped criticizing and the protests stopped happening.’ Ian Dunt compared Britain’s political environment to that of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary in a tweet posted last night, saying that while we are ‘not there yet’, the intention to ‘silence and then criminalize dissent is now very clear’. MPs voted the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill through with a majority of 96 in the House of Commons at the second reading, despite it being described as legislation that would ‘make a dictator blush’.”

Peat informs us that “The new bill will increase the police’s power to crack down on peaceful protests, with campaigners warning that the government is seeking to ‘silence dissent. David Lammy, the shadow secretary of state for justice, seemed to delve to the heart of the matter in a blistering speech given ahead of the vote. He said: ‘The truth … is (the Government) is introducing these measures because it dislikes Black Lives Matter, because it hates Extinction Rebellion, because both tell too many hard truths’.Despite the Bill having significant ramifications on the UK’s democracy it failed to appear on any of today’s front pages in the press. Six national newspapers, including the Mail, Express and Metro, focussed on the Royal Family instead as the Duke of Edinburgh was released from hospital and the Harry and Meghan scandal shows no sign of quieting down.”

Peat reports that “As Dunt tweeted, the scariest part about living under Orban was ‘when the silence came’. The ‘newspapers stopped criticizing and the protests stopped happening’.” In another Tweet he made the point “This is a law enforcing the silencing of protestors. But the most alarming thing about it was not its provisions. It was the silence from ministers about what it contained and the silence from Tory backbenchers about their duty to scrutinize it. I keep thinking back to this thing that a Hungarian journalist told me about living under Orban. ‘That the scariest part was when the silence came, when the newspapers stopped criticizing and the protests stopped happening. That’s when you knew you were fucked good and proper’.”

In the Labour List Article entitled “The authoritarianism of this government is clear. Here’s how we challenge it,” Clive Lewis offers warnings and encouragement for us to fight back. Lewis said “How often have we heard the notion that somehow liberty is an integral part of the English character? That we fortunate few in this country are somehow different from the rest of humanity. Not for us authoritarianism, or autocracy, or god forbid the dark slide into fascism. No, that’s for other people. Other countries. Not us. Well, today, in the second reading debate on the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill, we grappled yet again, with yet another bill from this government stripping the people of this country of yet more liberty and more of their democratic rights. English exceptionalism is a dangerous fallacy. None more so than when it comes to the constant vigilance required of any democracy. It’s hubris of the first order, one I fear has infected the government.”

Lewis warned of “The potential for a slide into authoritarianism and worse is, as history has clearly demonstrated, part of the human condition. That is the painful and bloody lesson we must learn from the 20th century.” He said “Yet here we are, with this bill before us. It is the tip of an authoritarian iceberg, one that’s on a collision course with public defiance. Democracy is being swept away, in a calculated program to leave the public muted and powerless. We see this in the demonization of the Gypsy, Traveller and Roma community as a cover to introduce the criminalization of trespass. We see it in the planned voter suppression bill, which will strip the right to vote from Black and other disadvantaged communities, adding yet another barrier to exercising the right to vote. We also see it in plans to limit judicial review, which will restrict the ability of the public to challenge the government’s decisions in court, shifting yet more power to the executive.”

Lewis targeted another horrific Tory Fascist Bill as he reminded us that “We saw it in the overseas operations bill, too. The creation of a two-tier, ‘them and us’ system of human rights was something I could only ever reject in the strongest possible terms. Having now passed that, the government is coming for our rights, with a review of UK human rights legislation. These are rights that have already been eroded these past 40 years and handed to large, opaque vested interests, both individual and corporate. This is the crisis of democracy. In the debate, I told the benches opposite that I see how they are fast-moving from becoming a government to becoming a regime. They want to stifle dissent, so they are not accountable to the public. Our country, our economy, our politics, our media, is controlled by a small clique of individuals. Over the last 40 years, they have taken more power for themselves at the expense of our democracy. Now they are not even happy with us clinging on to the scraps we have now.”

Appealing to his own Parliamentary colleagues Lewis said “To our own Labour frontbench, who were finally brought to the right position of opposition to this bill, I have this to say: it should not have taken the police assault on people gathered peacefully in memory of Sarah Everard to see the assault on democracy in this bill. It is writ large. Let this be a wake-up call. We have never seen anything like this government before. If this bill goes through, anyone who values their democratic rights must get organized and fight back.” The public allowed the BBC and Mainstream Media to dupe us into accepting the very obviously suspect result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election by drowning us in spurious pro-Tory propaganda to prop this corrupt Government into position. As the rampant corruption, squandering of public funds and systematic dismantling of our precious democracy, it has become even more urgent for us to demand a full Investigation into the unfathomable 2019 result and all of the ongoing assaults on our society.

Clive Lewis made a bold and rebellious personal commitment saying “I will stand with protesters, irrelevant of the laws passed by the House of Commons.” He urges the public to take action saying “I have an appeal to make everyone who wants to live in a democracy, friends from across parties in parliament, in civil society, in trade unions, the public, please: we must face the reality of the scale of action demanded by challenging the authoritarianism of this government and responding to the climate and ecological breakdown, epidemic of inequality, surveillance capitalism, automation, and AI.” The future looks very bleak for our young people, the working poor, the disabled and the most vulnerable as the Social Safety Net is dismantled in favor of a ‘Social Sluce.’ The obsessive greed of rampant neo-liberal capitalism is returning former democratic countries to authoritarian Dictatorships controlling an oppressive Corporate Feudalism. Lewis is right to sound the alarm while there is still time to derail this corrupt Tory regime.

Lews insists that “We must break out of the 20th-century political silos that have proven unfit for 21st-century challenges. We must create a democracy that is fit for purpose for the challenges we face: climate and ecological breakdown, the epidemic of inequality, and surveillance capitalism. That means a voting system where each vote counts equally, a fusion of direct and representative democracy, where people lead and act collectively, real power and resources distributed to communities, away from Westminster. I do not have the answers, but I believe the public does. So the future must not be imposed; it must be deliberated on in a people’s convention on the UK’s constitution. Proportionate action now demands an alliance of progressives both cross-party and wider civil society. If you want more democracy, not less, democrats must work together to remove power away from these aspiring authoritarians and give it over to the people of the UK.”

Another aspect of our crumbling quasi democracy remains our unelected second Chamber, the House of Lords. In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “SNP accuse Tories of ‘dodging democracy’ as Ruth Davidson is lined up for a Cabinet role,” they note that “It seems that now Tories don’t even need to bother standing in an election.” They point out that “Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson is being lined up for a job in Boris Johnson’s government, the SNP has claimed, with the MSP soon to take a seat in the unelected House of Lords. Ruth Davidson is currently a member of the Scottish Parliament, but is standing down to enter the House of Lords. She is urging Scots to vote Conservative to stop an SNP majority this May. In a move that the SNP said would be ‘a democratic obscenity,’ Cabinet member Michael Gove indicated that Davidson could be handed a government role even though she has not been elected.”

According to Left Foot Forward “In an interview with Scottish broadcaster STV, it was pointed out that with Davidson becoming a Baroness, ‘she’s not going to be part of the [Scottish Tory] team after the election’.” They say “Gove replied: ‘But Scotland has two governments, Scotland has two parliaments, and it’s important that we have talent in Westminster and in Holyrood and that they work together. That’s what I’m here to do, to make sure that those people work together’. The Tories have a track record for ‘undemocratic’ appointments to the unelected House of Lords. In January 2020, Nicky Morgan and Zac Goldsmith were appointed to the Lords so that they could keep their government positions. Goldsmith had been defeated by the Lib Dems in the 2019 election, while Morgan had stepped down as an MP. Other prominent non-elected appointments are Lord Andrew Dunlop and Lord Ian Duncan, who stood in an election and lost but was still appointed weeks later.”

Left Foot Forward report that “SNP MSP Rona Mackay said: ‘Michael Gove’s refusal to rule out Baroness Davidson securing an unelected place in Boris Johnson’s Government from the House of Lords shows the Tories’ utter disdain for democracy. ‘It seems that now Tories don’t even need to bother standing in an election and being held to account by the public in order to keep the perks of ministerial posts. That is a democratic obscenity. It’s bad enough for Ruth Davidson to have accepted a seat in the Lords, if she had any shred of integrity she would make it clear now she will not accept an unelected role in government, working for a man who led the Brexit campaign she once repeatedly accused of having ‘lied’ to people.” ‘Glow ball Britain’s’ bulging second chamber helps make our waning Democracy appear even more incredulous to overseas powers with each new batch of Tory cronies Boris Johnson manages to ram through the door. Who will rescue the British people when that hyped-up glow is snuffed out?

Still quoting Mackay Left Foot Forward say “Voters across Scotland would be rightly dismayed if an unelected politician was to pick up a ministerial salary on top of her cushy £300 [sic: £323] a day Lords’ job, after dodging democracy by running off to join a group of Tory donors, cronies and politicians rejected by the voters. The Westminster system is broken beyond repair,’ Mackay said. The SNP refuses to nominate peers to the House of Lords.” Other political parties just as vehemently opposed to our unelected Second Chamber have felt compelled to nominate peers to prevent an unstoppable Tory dominance in both Chambers, but it is a losing battle. Peers should be put forward for nomination based on service to the community and valued specialist knowledge not necessarily tagged to a particular constituency. Philanthropy should be judged relevant only as a percentage of personal wealth, but excluding political party donations. You might see Lord Jamie Oliver and Lord Marcus Rashford voted in by the people!

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “The Police Bill isn’t the only threat to civil liberties – just read the Coronavirus Act,” Charlie Jaay warns us of another expansive encroachment on our civil liberties. He says that “MPs are being urged to reject the ‘draconian’ Coronavirus Act when it returns for a vote later this month. The Coronavirus Act 2020 came into force last March, as an emergency response to the pandemic. But how long will it last? The measures in the Act range from closing borders, postponing some elections and suspending the power to recall any MP committing a crime, to detaining anyone who might be infectious, and relaxing human rights safeguards in a range of settings. From increasing surveillance and retention of DNA, to closing off care homes, critics argue the Coronavirus Act has created a range of new ‘draconian powers which have eroded civil liberties. The Act marked the largest expansion of executive power in peacetime Britain.”

Jaay claims “the government justifies this by describing measures as ‘reasonable, proportionate and based on the latest scientific evidence.’But a close look shows our lives and rights have changed beyond recognition, with almost no parliamentary scrutiny.” Jaay asks “What’s in the Act?” He explains that “Depending on the advice of the four chief medical officers, the new powers in the Act can be switched on and off whenever ministers feel necessary. Although time-limited to two years, the government states it is possible to extend the Act’s lifetime ‘if it is prudent to do so’ (para 8), therefore keeping these powers at their fingertips indefinitely. Some of the most far-ranging detention powers in modern legal history are found in schedule 21. It gives police, public health officials and immigration officers powers to forcibly detain, for up to 14 days (para 15.(1)), and take biological samples from anyone, including children, whom they have ‘reasonable grounds to suspect of being ‘potentially infectious’ (para 7.(1)).”

Jaay points out that “As many Covid cases are asymptomatic, police could have unlimited freedom to detain just about anyone.” But it doesn’t stop there, he says “Schedule 22 provides powers to close premises, cancel events, prohibit gatherings and ban protests but has not yet been activated. Instead, the government has used powers under the Public Health Act 1984 to carry out these prosecutions. However, this has not stopped confused police officers charging people under Schedule 22, and magistrates who do not know the law well enough have accepted the charges. In these situations, charges are rushed through, without proper scrutiny, leading to unlawful prosecutions. Police are also regularly using the Coronavirus Act to break up socially distanced demonstrations outdoors, despite the risks of outdoor transmission being low.” Jaay asks “What’s the alternative?”

Jaay highlights how “The UK’s leading human rights organization, Liberty, has drafted alternative legislation to the Coronavirus Act 2020, known as the Protect Everyone Bill, which it says will address the ‘civil rights crisis’ caused by the pandemic and ‘prioritize support over punishment.’ Liberty’s Director, Gracie Bradley told Left Foot Forward: ‘The pandemic has shown how much we rely on each other, yet politicians in charge have responded with a strategy that creates distrust and favors punishing people instead of providing support. ‘Those in power have failed to understand that we need to pull together and create strategies that protect everyone. A year into this crisis, we’re tired of waiting for alternatives, so we’ve come up with one ourselves.’ There are existing measures on the statute book that could be used instead. Two other alternatives to the Coronavirus Act, both of which contain sensible safeguards, are the Health and Social Care Act, 2008 and the Civil Contingencies Act 2004.”

Jaay explains that “Powers in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (HSCA 2008) s. 129-130 are very similar to those in the Coronavirus Act 2020, allowing ‘medical examination, detention, isolation or quarantine of a person who is suspected of being infectious.’ However, a magistrate must authorize the HSCA 2008 provisions, before allowing an individual to be detained by police. The Coronavirus Act has no such safeguards. Similarly, the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 (CCA 2004) contains wide-ranging measures, enabling similar restrictions of movement and assembly CA 2020 but, crucially, with the added safeguard that they must be reviewed every 30 days.”

Jaay reports that “Last year, civil liberties and privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch launched the Two years? Too Long campaign and helped ensure a six-monthly parliamentary vote on the Coronavirus Act. They believe it’s time to remove the extra policing roles from the statute books, particularly ones that aren’t being used.’ Madeleine Stone, Legal and Policy Officer for the group, said: ‘All the time [these powers] are sitting there they represent a danger to our rights. There’s been a lot of talk about ‘new normal’ recently, and we are deeply concerned these powers will remain in the statute books for a very long time to come,’ she said. Stone believes enforcing Covid rules through the police has been ‘unnecessary’: ‘People want to do the right thing, so using police to enforce these measures is counterproductive. It’s giving the police a whole new role in society, as public health officials, and that’s not what they are trained for’.”

According to Jaay “Parliamentarians are under pressure to repeal schedules 21 and 22 of the Coronavirus Act later this month. ‘We expressed concerns early on about these powers, and our worries have been justified. Unlawful use risks damaging trust in policing and the rule of law, and threatens our human rights, whilst having no benefit to public health,’ Stone tells LFF. Jonathan Lea is one of the founding members of Lawyers for Liberty, a group of legal professionals who monitor, educate and act upon potential legal issues raised by concerned citizens relating to the national coronavirus situation. ‘I have become increasingly concerned as the UK government’s restrictions have continued to be extended. Lawyers for Liberty recently started a Facebook group for anyone wanting to join, and we have been inundated with all sorts of horrifying stories of people facing incredible injustices and infringements on what should be their essential human rights’.”

Jaay says that Lawyers for Liberty concluded “This simply has to stop. I sincerely hope that the Coronavirus Act is repealed as soon as possible, before things get even worse for all of us,’ he said. ‘People should bear in mind Lord Acton’s infamous quote- ‘Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’ To date, all powers in the Coronavirus Act have been used unlawfully, with every single prosecution being dropped.” Covid has become a poor excuse that has enabled this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship to shut-dow peaceable assembly and ban public protest despite the pace of vaccination. Work and school are declared ‘Covid safe; even when the correct measures aren’t in place; soon it will again be declared ‘safe’ in close proximity to a cash register and the supreme leader will allow us to visit sports events. But people gathering to voice their discontent presents a real danger to the corrupt cabal that seized power in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. We must demand restoration of our right to Get The Tories Out! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Despite the shocking events of the past week Boris Johnson sounded upbeat as he waded into a potentially scathing session of Prime Minister’s questions by jovially “wishing everyone a very happy St Patrick’s day. I was delighted to visit Northern Ireland last week where I was able to thank military and emergency response teams for their brilliant work throughout the covid-19 pandemic.” Tory MP Simon Fell lamented that “A decade ago, GlaxoSmithKline announced a £350 million investment in my constituency, which would have led to 1,000 jobs. In 2017, it reneged on that, and a few weeks ago it announced that it is closing its business altogether. We have gone from the very real prospect of having 1,000 high-paying, high-skilled pharma jobs in my constituency to the risk of having none by 2025.” I wonder why? Could it be just one of the negative consequences of Brexit…? The PM blathered on “Bioscience is one of the great growth areas for this country in the future… take part in that boom… other high technologies.”

After St Patrick’s Day wishes Starmer said, “My thoughts, and I am sure those across the whole House, are with the family and friends of Sarah Everard, who will be suffering unspeakable grief. There are five words that will stick with us for a very long time: she was just walking home. Sometimes, a tragedy is so shocking that it demands both justice and change. The Stephen Lawrence case showed the poison of structural and institutional racism. The James Bulger case made us question the nature of our society and the safety of our children. Now the awful events of the last week have lifted a veil on the epidemic of violence against women and girls. This must also be a watershed moment, to change how we as a society treat women and girls, and how we prevent and end sexual violence and harassment. I believe that, if we work together, we can achieve that, and the questions I ask today are in that spirit. First does the Prime Minister agree that this must be a turning point in how we tackle violence against women and girls?”

Given the gravity of use of force at the vigil this was a weak request; the PM said “Yes I do, and I associate myself fully with the remarks that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has made about the appalling murder of Sarah Everard. I am sure that those emotions are shared in this House and around the country. That event has triggered a reaction that I believe is wholly justified and understandable, and of course we in government are doing everything that we can. We are investing in the Crown Prosecution Service, trying to speed up the law; we are changing the law on domestic violence, and many, many other things. But the right hon. and learned Gentleman is right, frankly, that unless and until we have a change in our culture that acknowledges and understands that women currently do not feel they are being heard, we will not fix this problem. That is what we must do. We need a cultural and social change in attitudes to redress the balance. That is what I believe all politicians must now work together to achieve.”

Starmer groveled “I thank the Prime Minister for that answer. In that spirit, can I turn to the practical challenges we face if we are collectively to rise to this moment? The first challenge is that many, many women and girls feel unsafe on our streets, particularly at night. What is needed is legal protection. That is why we have called for a specific new law on street harassment and for toughening the law on stalking. Both, I think, are absolutely vital if we are going to make meaningful changes in the everyday experiences of women and girls. So can the Prime Minister commit to taking both of those measures forward?” The PM replied “We are always happy to look at new proposals. What we are already doing is introducing tougher sanctions on stalkers. That is already being brought in and we are bringing in new measures to make the streets safer. Of course that is the right thing to do. Last night there was a Bill before the House on police, crime and sentencing, which did a lot to protect women and girls. It would have been good, in a cross-party way, to have had the support of the Opposition.”

Starmer said “I will come to last night’s Bill later, but it did say a lot more about protecting statues than it did about protecting women. Let me, if I may, given the gravity of the situation, continue in the spirit so far. I thank the Prime Minister for his answer. The next practical challenge is that many, many women and girls who are subjected to sexual violence do not feel confident to come forward and report what has happened to them. Nine out of 10 do not do so. We have to improve the support that is provided for victims. The Victims’ Commissioner published a report last month with 32 recommendations about this. This week, Labour produced a detailed survivor support plan, and five years ago I introduced a private Member’s Bill, with cross-party support, for a victims’ law to give legally enforceable rights to victims. The shadow victims Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Hove (Peter Kyle), has tabled a similar victims’ Bill that is before Parliament now. It is ready to go. All it needs is the political will to act.”

Starmer asked “So will the Prime Minister commit now not just to the idea of a victims’ law, which I think he supports, but to a tight timetable, of ideally six months or so, to actually implement such a law? The PM replied “As I say, I would be very happy to look at new proposals from all sides of the House on this issue. That is why we are conducting an end-to-end review of the law on rape and how it works, and investing in the criminal justice system to speed up cases and give women and girls the confidence they need. The point the right hon. and learned Gentleman makes about victims and their need to feel confident in coming forward is absolutely right. That is why we have put £100 million so far into services for dealing with violence against women and girls, particularly independent domestic violence advisers and independent sexual violence advisers. I do not pretend that these are the entire solution; they are part of the solution. It is also vital that we have long-term cultural, societal change to deal with this issue.”

Starmer said “I agree with the Prime Minister on that last point. Can I gently remind him that for 10 years this Government have been promising a victims’ law? I think it has been in his party’s last three manifestos. It still has not materialized. We do not need more reviews, consultations, strategies. The conversations our shadow Minister is having with Government, constructive conversations, are exactly the same conversations that I had five years ago: constructive conversations. We just need now to get on with it. Let me press on with the practical challenges. The next challenge is this. For many, many women and girls who do come forward to report sexual violence, no criminal charges are brought. Only 1.5% of rapes reported to the police lead to a prosecution. Put the other way, 98.5% of reported rapes do not lead to a prosecution. That is a shocking statistic. I appreciate that efforts are being made to improve the situation, but can the Prime Minister tell us: what is he going to do about this not in a few years’ time, not next year, but now?”

Had Boris expected a more vigorous attack? Starmer was delivering the kid-glove accommodating, zero opposition treatment, the PM replied “The right hon. and learned Gentleman is entirely right. I agree with him; one of the first things I said when I became Prime Minister was that I believed that the prosecution rates for rape were a disgrace in this country. We need to sort it out. That is why we are investing in confidence-building measures, such as ISVAs and IDVAs, and investing in the Crown Prosecution Service in trying to speed up the process of the law to give people confidence that their cases will be heard in due time. We are also doing what we can to toughen the penalties for those men, I am afraid it is overwhelmingly men, who commit these crimes. I think it would have been a good thing if, last night, the whole House could have voted for tougher sentences for those who commit sexual and violent offenses and to stop people from being released early. In that collegiate spirit, I ask him to work together with us.”

Starmer boasted “I was Director of Public Prosecutions for five years and spent every day prosecuting serious crime, including terrorism, sexual violence and rape, so I really do not need lectures about how to enforce the criminal law. Walking on through the system, as many women and girls have to do, and facing up to the challenges that we need to face as a House, the next challenge is the point that the Prime Minister just referenced, the sentences for rape and sexual violence, because they need to be toughened. Let me give the House three examples. John Patrick, convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl, received a seven-year sentence. Orlando and Costanzo, who were convicted of raping a woman in a nightclub, received a seven-and-a-half-year sentence. James Reeve, convicted of raping a seven-year-old girl, received a nine-year sentence. Does the Prime Minister agree that we need urgently to look at this and to toughen sentences for rape and serious sexual violence?”

If there was a giant bear trap Starmer just blundered into it! Johnson crowed “Would it not be a wonderful thing if there was a Bill going through the House of Commons that did exactly that? Would it not be a wonderful thing if there were measures to defend women and girls from violence and sex criminals? Would it not be a wonderful thing if there was a Bill before the House to have tougher sentences for child murderers and tougher punishments for sex offenders? That would be a fine thing. As it happens, there is such a Bill before the House. I think it would be a great thing if the right hon. and learned Gentleman had actually voted for it. He still has time. This Bill is still before the House. He can lift his opposition. They actually voted against it on a three-line Whip and I think that was crazy.” It was also targeting Gypsies for ethnic cleansing, criminalizing protests and all in all the most aggressive assault on our civil liberties in decades, but who reads through the fine print in the Tories toxic legislation?

Keir Starmer plodded on unruffled by gravity of the horrendous Policing Bill being rammed through Parliament he said “The Prime Minister mentions the Bill last night. That provided for longer maximum sentences for damaging a memorial than the sentences imposed in the three cases of rape I have referred the House to, which were all less than 10 years. I thank the Prime Minister for providing me with the best examples of why the priorities in his Bill were so wrong. Nothing in that Bill would have increased the length of sentence in any of those rape cases, nothing in that Bill. Let me try to return to the constructive spirit, because I think that is demanded of all of us. If this House came together on the points raised today, and there has been agreement across the Dispatch Boxes, it would make a real difference to victims of crime. This week, Labour published a 10-point plan. We published a victims’ law. In coming days, we are going to publish amendments in relation to the criminal justice system to make it work better.”

Starmer’s constructive spirit should be confined to a few drams at the bar but he continued his tedious groveling saying “I do not expect the Prime Minister to agree with all of this and, frankly, I do not care if this becomes a Government Bill or Conservative legislation. All I care about is whether we make progress, so will the Prime Minister meet me, the shadow Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds), my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Jess Phillips) and victims’ groups, who have spent many years campaigning on this, so that we can really and truly make this a turning point?” Relieved to see his faithful Trojan horse behaving so well that day Johnson said “I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for the collegiate way in which he is addressing this and the way in which he is reaching out across the Chamber. I think that is entirely right in the circumstances, but I do think that he should not misrepresent what the Bill was trying to do.”

The PM continued “The average sentence for rape is already nine years and nine months, as he knows full well, and the maximum sentence is already life. What we are trying to do is stiffen the sentences for a variety of offenses to protect women and girls and others, and that is entirely the right thing to do. We will go on with our agenda to deliver on the people’s priorities, rolling out more police, 7,000 we have already, investing in ISVAs and IDVAs and doing our utmost to accelerate the grinding processes of the criminal justice system, which, as he rightly says, are such a deterrent to women coming forward to complain as they rightly should. Until we sort out that fundamental problem, and until women feel that their voices are being heard and their complaints are being addressed by society, we will not fix this problem. I warmly welcome what he suggests about wanting to fix it together, and I hope that, in that spirit, he can bring himself to vote for the tougher sentences that we have set out.” ]

At this point the Speaker interjected “We have to be a little bit careful, because nobody would misrepresent anyone in this House.” You could have fooled me. At a later point in PMQs the Speaker called ‘Order’ to clarify that “The hon. Lady just said ‘you.’ We cannot use ‘you’. I am not responsible for this,” despite the fact that ‘you’ was clearly aimed at the PM. I continue to take offense at the extraordinary scope the Speaker allows Boris Johnson in his expansive bragging that includes blatant lies. At the same time it violates the rules on the House of Commons to actually call out another MP for lying in the Chamber, (not to mention disrespectfully sprawling across the green benches!) This flaw in the system gives televised Parliamentary credence to Johnson’s pervasive lies.

After a grateful plug from Tory Steve Double thanking the PM “for bringing the G7 leaders’ summit to Cornwall this summer” the SNP Leader Ian Blackford also joined in wishing everyone a happy St Patrick’s day. He then unleashed his wrath on the PM, this is what opposition looks like Starmer! He said “Across Scotland this week, a tale of two Governments with two very different sets of values has again been exposed. Yesterday, the Scottish National party Government passed landmark legislation that will put the UN convention on the rights of the child into Scots law, putting children at the vanguard of children’s rights. In contrast, we have a UK Government who have to be shamed into providing free school meals, who will clap for nurses but will not give them a fair wage, and who plow billions into a nuclear arsenal that sits redundant on the Clyde. Does the Prime Minister understand that the Scottish people are best served by a Government who live up to their values, a Government who prioritize bairns not bombs?”

Once again Johnson arrogantly claimed to be speaking for the majority of Scotts as he said “I think what the people of Scotland need and deserve is a Government who tackle the problems of education in Scotland, a Government who address themselves to fighting crime and drug addiction in Scotland, and a Government who can wean themselves off their addiction to constitutional change and constitutional argument, because they seem, in the middle of a pandemic when the country is trying to move forward together, to be obsessed with nothing else, nothing else, but breaking up the country and a reckless referendum.” Blackford tried to remind Johnson that “Of course, this is Prime Minister’s questions, and maybe the Prime Minister might, just once, try to answer the question that is put to him. We are talking about a Tory plan to impose a 40% increase in nuclear warheads” The Speaker has given up reprimanding Boris for this repeated transgression.

Blackford said “Our children have the right to a future that no longer lives under the shadow of these weapons of mass destruction. As the Irish President said on this St Patrick’s day, we need to find ways to make peace, not war. Every single one of those weapons will be based on the Clyde, so can the Prime Minister tell us exactly when the Scottish people gave him the moral or democratic authority to impose those weapons of mass destruction on our soil in Scotland?” They have every right to be outraged, but Johnson still tried to claim their support “The people of Scotland contribute enormously to the health, happiness, wellbeing and security of the entire country, not least through their contribution to our science, our defenses, our international aid and in many other ways. I am very proud that this Government are investing record sums in defense, including maintaining our nuclear defense, which is absolutely vital for our long-term security, and helping, thereby, to drive jobs not just in Scotland, but across the UK.”

Tory Nick Fletcher started winging about not being one of the favored Tory constituencies to be blessed with a fanciful promise of a new Hospital, “among the first 40 hospitals promised in the manifesto,” he went on to allude to the latest expansion of the PMs empty pledge re “building of a further eight specialist hospitals.” Johnson fed into this illusion by telling him Doncaster was “very much in the running in the current open competition for the next eight hospitals, on top of the 40 that we are already building.” They say if you are going to lie, make it a very big lie and Boris really knows how to present some whopping Porkies, but no one in the UK Media is demanding the details on these elusive 40 new Hospitals, no one is calling him out on whether they are real or not.

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas packs a hefty punch when she crams a massive opposition rebuke into her fast-paced question of the PM. She said “The creation of a no-protest zone around Parliament, a 266% increase from a maximum of three months to 11 months’ imprisonment for protest organizers, a direct attack on the Gypsy, Roma and Traveler community, up to 10 years in prison for any offense committed by destroying or damaging a memorial, and criminalizing people for taking part in protests where they ought to have known police conditions were in place. Does the Prime Minister agree that if the UK is to be a force for good in a world where democracy is ‘in retreat’, as the Foreign Secretary is saying today, it needs to start at home with the protection of the long-standing, precious and fundamental right to peaceful protest, which is a cornerstone of liberal democracy?” Can you imagine how badly she could decimate the Tories if they allowed our Geen Party Leader to as six questions in a row?

The PM defensively replied “The hon. Lady is quite right to stick up for peaceful protest, and I understand and sympathize with that, but there are a couple of points. First, we are facing a pandemic in which, alas, we have to restrict human contact,” he halted in response to Lucas’s gesture of disgust over this no longer valid excuse to prohibit well-organized Covid safe events like this weekend’s prohibited vigil. He continued “Although the hon. Lady shakes her head, I think the people of this country do understand that and do understand the restrictions we are now under. I think we also have to strike a balance between the need to allow peaceful protests to go ahead, and we do on a huge scale in this country, and the need to protect free speech and vital parts of the UK economy.” He was referring to the right for the police to support Corporate thugs in bullying the public into silence. Tory Andrew Jones was quick to leap to the defense of the new powers Tories voted for in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.

What a pity men dominated PMQ when the focus was on the plight of women but Labour MP Charlotte Nichols weighed in saying “With the Government’s end-to-end rape review remaining unpublished, two years after it was promised, rape conviction rates having fallen to their lowest point on record and almost 90% of sexual harassment complaints not even reported to the police, women are increasingly being left without legal recourse against sexual violence. I have parliamentary privilege and can name the men who have hurt me, but millions of women in this country do not have that. Women are stuck between a criminal justice system in which only 1.4% of reported offenses result in charges being laid and too many survivors who speak out being pursued through the civil courts by their abusers to silence them. Can the Prime Minister advise how they are meant to get justice?”

The PM’s shameless reply was to say “I am afraid that the hon. Lady is completely right, and I know that she speaks for many women up and down the country. We can do all the things we have talked about, two men arguing over the Dispatch Box. We can bring in more laws and tougher sentences, which I hope she will support. We can support independent domestic violence and sexual violence advisers. We can do all that kind of thing, but we have to address the fundamental issue of the casual everyday sexism and apathy that fail to address the concerns of women. That is the underlying issue.” The Tories decimated legal aid while raising the bar for rape prosecution eligibility, but they have also disproportionately targeted women with austerity cuts. After a decade long assault, punishing the most impoverished families, no one can convince me that women voted for their children to starve to secure the fake Tory ‘landslide victory’ in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election: demand a robust Investigation of the result! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

My perception of Gypsies was influenced by an experience in my early teens; I used to go fishing with the father of a friend of mine who was of Romany heritage. We shared a strong appreciation of the natural environment and he taught me a few useful survival techniques including how to recognize plants growing in the wild that that were safe to eat. I am deeply concerned that buried in the fine print of the controversial Policing Bill, and gaining a lot less publicity, is a direct aggressive assault on the Traveller’s way of life. While we should be outraged over the curtailment of basic civil liberties and the criminalization of our right to protest, another serious threat to basic human rights looms within this toxic piece of legislation the Tories just rammed through Parliament. Writ large in that Policing Bill was a powerful indication of where the UK is headed under this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship: a ruthless determination to emulate the repression and persecution of a minority ethnic group, Gypsies, under the Nazi regime in Germany.

On a chilling Wikipedia page tracing the origins of the Nazi’s “Romani Genocide” they detail the changes in German Law preceding the final act of extermination. Under the heading “Persecution under the German Empire and the Weimar Republic” it says “The developments of racial pseudo-science and modernization resulted in anti-Romani state interventions, carried out by both the German Empire and the Weimar Republic. In 1899, the Imperial Police Headquarters in Munich established the Information Services on Romani by the Security Police. Its purpose was to keep records (identification cards, fingerprints, photographs, etc.) and continuous surveillance on the Roma community. Roma in the Weimar Republic were forbidden from entering public swimming pools, parks, and other recreational areas, and depicted throughout Germany and Europe as criminals and spies.”

But where does the new UK legislation take us on this pathway to persecution? The Wikipedia segment continues in “1926 ‘Law for the Fight Against Gypsies, Vagrants and the Workshy’ was enforced in Bavaria, becoming the national norm by 1929. It stipulated that groups identifying as ‘Gypsies’ avoid all travel to the region. Those already living in the area were to ‘be kept under control so that there [was] no longer anything to fear from them with regard to safety in the land.’ They were forbidden from ‘roam[ing] about or camp[ing] in bands,’ and those ‘unable to prove regular employment’ risked being sent to forced labor for up to two years. Herbert Heuss notes that ‘[t]his Bavarian law became the model for other German states and even for neighboring countries.’ The demand for Roma to give up their nomadic ways and settle in a specific region was often the focus of anti-Romani policy both of the German Empire and the Weimar Republic.” How much do the Tories hate our unemployed also demonized as ‘workshy’?

“Once settled, communities were concentrated and isolated in one area within a town or city.[21] This process facilitated state-run surveillance practices and ‘crime prevention.’ Following the passage of the Law for the Fight Against Gypsies, Vagrants, and the Workshy, public policy increasingly targeted the Roma on the explicit basis of race. In 1927, Prussia passed a law that required all Roma to carry identity cards. Eight thousand Roma were processed this way and subjected to mandatory fingerprinting and photographing. Two years later, the focus became more explicit. In 1929, the German state of Hessen proposed the ‘Law for the Fight Against the Gypsy Menace’. The same year the Centre for the Fight Against Gypsies in Germany was opened. This body enforced restrictions on travel for undocumented Roma and ‘allowed for the arbitrary arrest and detention of gypsies as a means of crime prevention.”

On the Hodge, Jones & Allen Website, Solicitor Cormac Mannion explains this deadly consequence of the Policing Bill, that has gained far less public attention, in a piece entitled “Criminalising a way of life: The Police Powers and Protection Bill” Posted on 9th February 2021 it says “In 2004, Sir Trevor Philips, then Chair of The Commission for Racial Equality, described discrimination against Gypsy, Roma and Traveller (GRT) communities as ‘the last respectable form of racism’ in the UK. Members of the GRT community are protected from race discrimination by the Equality Act 2010, and yet a 2017 report by the Traveller Movement found that 91% of GRT individuals had experienced discrimination because of their ethnicity, 77% had experienced hate speech or hate crime, and, perhaps most worrying for legal aid lawyers, 77% had not sought legal help after experiencing discrimination.”

Mannion warns that “Rather than seek to address the discrimination faced by these marginalized communities, it appears the government plans to punish them further by introducing legislation which includes proposals to criminalize trespass and the act of setting up an ‘unauthorized’ encampment. The Police Powers and Protections Bill, which has been consulted on and is due to be published soon, seeks to implement a 2019 Conservative Party Manifesto pledge to ‘give the police new powers to arrest and seize the property and vehicles of trespassers who set up unauthorized encampment” and to ‘make intentional trespass a criminal offense.’ Trespass is currently governed by civil law and upgrading trespass to a criminal offense would have significant ramifications for protesters, the homeless and GRT communities in particular.”

Mannion rightly claims that “The Police Powers and Protections Bill is one of a raft of increasingly authoritarian Bills introduced by this government, others of which have garnered more media attention, such as the ‘Spy Cops’ Bill and the Overseas Operation Bill, the former of which was characterized by Labour peer and prominent human rights lawyer Shami Chakrabarti as ‘one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation I’ve seen.’ Despite the relative lack of media attention to the Police Powers and Protections Bill, an unlikely coalition has emerged opposing the proposed legislation. On 18 January 2021, a letter was sent to the Home Secretary denouncing the government’s proposals to criminalize trespass as ‘an extreme, illiberal and unnecessary attack on ancient freedoms.’ Signatories to the letter range from advocacy groups such as Homeless Link and Friends Families and Travellers to outdoor sports governing bodies such as the British Mountaineering Council and British Canoeing.”

With alarm Mannion reports that “The letter raises concerns that ‘criminalizing trespass or increasing police powers of eviction would compound the inequalities experienced’ by GRT communities. The letter also suggests that ‘extending the definition of ‘unauthorized encampment’ would have the effect of criminalizing the increasing numbers of rough sleepers living in makeshift shelters or tents.’ As the composition of the unlikely coalition opposing the legislation suggests, the proposals in the Bill not only represent an attack on GRT communities, but also on the rights of everyone to freely access, explore and enjoy the British countryside without fear of prosecution. As the letter states, criminalizing trespass would ‘send a signal that the countryside is not an open resource accessible to all but a place of complex rules and regulations, where stepping off a public path could lead to a criminal sentence’.”

Mannion elaborates on earlier state interventions to rob us of our rights “For those with an interest in British legal history, legislation that might have the twin effects of criminalizing the homeless and restricting the rights of people to access the countryside is uncomfortably reminiscent of two of the most controversial legislative developments in British history: the Vagrancy Act of 1824 which criminalizes the very act of being homeless and remains in force to this day (for now); and Enclosure, the bitterly fought centuries-long legal process in which the commons were privatized and the rights of ordinary people to access and make use of the land severely repressed. As legal aid lawyers who act for members of the GRT community in disputes ranging from eviction to discrimination, we are deeply concerned that the Police Powers and Protection Bill will represent a huge step backward for these communities and urge the government to reconsider their commitment to criminalize trespass and unauthorized encampments.”

We need to realize that this draconian change in the law not only targets gypsies, but can be liberally interpreted to encompass everyone from the homeless on our streets to hikers, campers and those on a family campervan holiday. On the 17th of March the Gypsy-Traveller.org Website posted a “New tool launched for people to write to their MP about harsh new laws for roadside camps.” They reminded the public that “The Government is planning to bring in new harsh laws for nomadic people. Today, Friends, Families and Travellers launch a new tool which will support Gypsies, Travelers and members of the public to write to their MP, registering their concerns about the Policing, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. There is a significant national shortage of places for nomadic Gypsies and Travellers to legally and safely stop. However, the Government is planning to bring in new laws which means people who live on roadside camps could face time in prison, a £2500 fine or their home being taken from them.”

Gypsy-Traveller.org say that “While the Government says that the laws are meant to target only a small number of people who engage in anti-social behavior on roadside camps, in reality, the proposals are widely open to interpretation and are likely to impact upon everyone who is or wishes to live nomadically, by culture, choice or necessity. Everybody needs a place to live. It should not be a crime to have nowhere to go.” They urge you to “Use our quick and easy tool to email your MP today.” Those who chose to live close to nature are far less inclined to be destructive and dump garbage. Our consumer-driven society results in a throwaway culture where people who live in comfortable homes fly-tip the items they regularly discard; this isn’t part of the Gypsy way of life. Having spent many years of my life in a nomadic lifestyle living aboard boats I can empathize with their desire to roam.

I was just sent an email regarding the progress of the Petition that I signed “Don’t criminalize trespass” saying it will now be debated in Parliament. As our opportunities for dissent in the UK narrow considerably under this authoritarian Tory regime, we should not overlook the possibility still available via this Parliamentary Petition site to demand that an issue is debated in the House of Commons. We do not know how soon this avenue will be shut down to silence the public voice. The Petition appeal was worded to expose how “The Government’s manifesto stated ‘we will make intentional trespass a criminal offense’: an extreme, illiberal & unnecessary attack on ancient freedoms that would threaten walkers, campers, and the wider public. It would further tilt the law in favor of the landowning 1% who own half the country.”

In further detail the Petition warns that “For a thousand years, trespass has been a civil offence – but now the Government is proposing to make trespass a criminal offense: a crime against the state. Doing so could: – Criminalise ramblers who stray even slightly from the path; – Remove the ability of local residents to establish new rights of way; – Criminalise wild camping, denying hikers a night under the stars; – Clampdown on peaceful protest, a fundamental right and essential part of our democracy; – Impact Traveller communities.” The Petition closed with a grand total of: 134,932 Signatures. I was informed that “Parliament will debate this petition on 19 April 2021. You’ll be able to watch online in the UK Parliament YouTube channel.”

In the Canary Article entitled “14 signs the UK is becoming a modern fascist state,” they offer a stark warning to the UK public saying that “#FacistBritain has been trending on Twitter. But can we quantify whether the UK is descending into a modern, fascist state? Simply put: yes, we can.” They describe “Fascism’s ‘defining characteristics’: nationalism and disregard for human rights. Che Scott-Heron Newton tweeted how she believed fascism was ‘presenting in modern Britain’. She noted four areas. One was ‘Powerful and Continuing Nationalism’. In this instance, she gave the example of police protecting a Winston Churchill statue: Heron’s second example was: Disregard for human rights: people are more likely to approve of longer incarcerations of prisoners, look the other way. She gave the example of the current furor of the so-called ‘Police Bill’.”

But, the Canary report she said “the degradation of UK human rights has been ongoing for a long time. Back in 2016, the UN accused successive Tory-led governments of ‘grave’ and ‘systematic’ violations of sick and disabled people’s human rights. With the UK’s potential withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights, things will only get worse.” Under “The arts and crime” they say “Heron’s third point was: Disrespect towards intellectuals & the arts. Tory attempts to clamp-down on universities ‘cancelling‘ far-right bigots from speaking forms part of this. Or, as The Canary‘s Maryam Jameela put it, the Tories attempt to ‘quash dissent’. Then, you have the Tories’ attacks on ‘lefty lawyers’ doing human rights work. Meanwhile, in recent years, they’ve also cut public arts funding by 35%.”

The Canary note that “Finally, Heron said: Obsession with crime & punishment. The recent Policing, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill (the ‘Police Bill’) is a case in point. As Liberty said, it includes: dangerous measures including restrictions on protest, new stop and search powers, a ‘Prevent-style’ duty on knife crime, and a move to criminalize trespass. Also, the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill allows intelligence services to break the law on UK soil. So, Heron summed up some major indicators of fascism well. It was in-part based on historian Laurence Britt’s 2003 work on the signs of a fascist regime.” If this is the road we are heading down we would do well to remember that if we fail to remove this authoritarian regime from power ASAP, like Hungary, Turkey and so many repressive states we will be forced to endure decades of Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

The Canary asks, “Picking apart his remaining ten points, how does the UK look? Signs of a Fascist regime,” “scapegoats and sexism, Britt noted: Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. From immigrants to Muslims via disabled people, the UK establishment has always had ‘enemies’ and ‘scape-goats’. Now, we’re seeing left-wing activists, Black Lives Matter and the ‘woke’ being the target. Another point Britt said was: Rampant sexism. The recent clamping-down on vigils and protests in the wake of Sarah Everard’s murder is a chilling sign. Not that Tory misogyny is anything new. For example, just in the social security system you had the so-called ‘rape clause‘ and the benefit cap hitting lone mothers the hardest.” Rampant unchecked misogyny encourages the male half of the population to persecute the female half of the population, inhibiting their rights and limiting their opportunities while ignoring violence towards them is the ultimate ‘divide and conquer’ tactic used by repressive regimes all over the world.

The biased BBC and alt-right UK Media barons convinced the public that the Covert 2019 Rigged Election was legit; no need to demand a robust Investigation of the unfathomable result, just ‘Keep Calm and Carry On” in complacent silence. The Canary next identify “The mass media and national security,” pointing out an area where we do not fare at all well, saying “Britt also listed: A controlled mass media. The UK media is already controlled by a handful of right-wing billionaires. Now, with GB News, Rupert Murdoch’s News UK TV, former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre potentially heading-up the media regulator Ofcom, and a Tory donor being put in charge of the BBC, it’s going to get even more dystopian. Britt added: Obsession with national security. The Tories’ upping the cap on the number of nuclear weapons the UK can have is one example. Its review looking at left-wing ‘extremism’ is another. Amnesty called the Investigatory Powers Act (which allowed mass surveillance) ‘among the most draconian in the EU’.”

The Canary explain “The new religion and corporations” saying that “Another marker of Britt’s was: Religion and ruling elite tied together. Flip this into capitalism being the new religion, the mantra that guides how we all live our lives, and it fits with Britt’s description of fascism being marked by a ‘manufactured perception’ ‘that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion’. The Tories blocking of anti-capitalist teaching in schools sums this up. A crucial point of Britt’s was also: Power of corporations protected. This has been ongoing for decades. But it has reached a crescendo in recent years. The Tories allow big companies to pay tiny amounts of tax. Also, the revolving door between big business and big government is constantly open. As the Week wrote last year: Facebook has hired ten former UK government policy officials with insider knowledge of regulatory processes since the beginning of 2020, an investigation has found.”

The Canary say that “The new claims about the so-called ‘revolving door’ between politics and the private sector come just a week after J.P. Morgan announced that former chancellor Sajid Javid has been appointed as a senior advisor to the banking giant.” In “Suppressing labour and cronyism,” they note “Britt then moved on to Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. The Tories moves to restrict protest is a current example. And in 2015, The Tories put in place what the Guardian called the ‘biggest crackdown on trade unions for 30 years’. The gig economy helps this. And the consistently low minimum wage puts the power in the hands of the bosses. Perhaps Britt’s most recognizable point was: Rampant cronyism and corruption. This is the Tories all over; not least during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. As Byline Times wrote on 16 March: A company owned by a Conservative Party donor has surpassed £200 million worth of Government contracts during the Coronavirus pandemic ‘Nuff said’.”

The Canary then focused on “Election fraud” saying “Finally, Britt noted: Fraudulent elections. The 2015 election was marred by allegations of Tory election fraud. So was the EU referendum. The establishment corporate press helped get Boris Johnson into power in 2019. But the Tories are taking their election rigging agenda further. Our First Past The Post voting system has consolidated their power.” There was so little furor even from the progressive left with regard to disputing the Covert 2019 Rigged Election result at the time; instead of calling out the massive privatised electoral system corruption we had naval gazing and limp excuses in a rush to admit failure. They warn us that “Now, they’ll be rolling it out to all English elections. As City A.M. reported, in London Assembly elections this: would ‘wipe out’ many smaller parties like the Liberal Democrats and The Green Party. So, is all this truly fascism? On paper, the signs are there. But there’s probably a better name for it. And that is ‘Corporate Fascism’.”

The Canary explain the term “Corporate fascism” noting “As Johanna Drucker wrote for Riot Material on the US under then-president Donald Trump: Fascism is defined as the alignment of power, nationalism, and authoritarian government. We are there. The power is capital linked to politics. Capital is not merely the currency of money, but a force with nearly animate capacity for agency. The nationalism is an inflammatory rhetoric that galvanizes affect from responses to actual conditions (the real erosion of social infrastructure) in combination with a fantasy of entitlement grounded in long-standing myths of American exceptionalism. And the authoritarianism is an increasingly evident fulfillment of the worst fears of the founding designers of Democracy, as its checks and balances are put aside in favor of the interests of corporate wealth and its beneficiaries as a grotesque populism feeds on lifestyle fantasies and delusional identification.”

The Canary warn “Corporate fascism is wanton, virulent, and unregulated. Wanton because it has no regard for consequences (psycho-socio-political pathology is without constraints). Virulent because the full force of inflamed populism is fuelled by self-justified rage and unbounded triumphalism. Unregulated because the capital is now amassed in extreme concentrations of wealth without any controls. Corporate because Citizens United created the legal foundation for corporations to act with the same rights, privileges, and protections accorded to individuals, thus sanctifying the role of disproportionate power within a mythic construct of corporate entities. Johnson’s government is also using that MO. It’s no exaggeration to say that corporate fascism has been creeping into the UK for decades and it now appears the situation is only going to get worse.” The blatant targeting of one ethnic minority, Gypsies for systematic state persecution is a stark warning of what is ahead: we must get this Fascist Tory regime out ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

As the UK national Covid death continues its deadly climb towards 130,000, beyond the early reflections on what went wrong we should start with our preparedness, including the central role of that critical emergency stockpile of Personal Protective Equipment: PPE. Politicians are eager to proclaim what is universally accepted, that the first duty of any and all Governments is to protect the population of this country from harm. But, despite all of the warnings indicating that a consensus of opinion on the greatest threat to our national security was a global Pandemic the leadership in power for the last decade slashed the funding required to maintain this vital PPE preparedness. Instead of vigilantly monitored and upgraded the PPE supplies required to protect our NHS and care workforce so that they were ready to combat that threat they abandoned that duty, putting us all at risk. We are now living with the single worst consequence of warped Tory austerity: the highest Covid death toll in Europe and among the very highest globally.

Although there is always empty talk of ‘lessons learned’ sadly we are encumbered with a rogue Tory Government even more toxic than past iterations of the political far-right: robust scrutiny and accountability are not in their lexicon and they never learn from their repeated catastrophic mistakes. Beyond the unforgivable failure of their ideologically driven economic disaster that rendered the UK so critically unprepared, they are seeking a new way to rebrand their dire austerity agenda. Contrast the cuts to public services and frozen wages with the relentless squandering of public funds on failed programs led by trusted cronies or the reckless ‘money is no object’ spending spree on the Downing Street propaganda suite, but even that is not the worst obscenity. No, while we are barely even beginning to emerge from the ignored Pandemic threat, there’s another stockpile Tories want to prioritize by increasing our nuclear arsenal by 40%, allegedly to protect us from a mirage of threats from biological to cyber from unspecified ‘hostile states!’

“Bearns not bombs” intoned the furious SNP Leader at the last Prime Minister’s Questions; no wonder the Scottish people are so desperately eager to disconnect from this insane Westminster cabal: they do not want more nuclear warheads stockpiled in their backyard. The ominous threat that the UK might actually consider deploying such deadly weapons of mass destruction not just to deter a direct nuclear, but to ward off a biological incident or a pesky cyber nuisance from one of our confected enemies, no doubt identified by former panty salesman turned self-proclaimed search-engine sleuth Belingcat. Will the Tories adopt the ‘Bethlehem Doctrine’ of shoot first ask questions later in their ‘MAD’ Mutual Assured Destruction’s march towards global armageddon? Most of the major military confrontations of the past century have been deliberately engineered in response to a False Flag incident, Iraq and Vietnam being two clear examples. Now the annihilation of life on this planet could come down to the bum-steer of Belingcat!

This destructive Tory brinksmanship is the latest ‘willy-wagging’ from insecure politicians eager to assert the forgotten dominance of our extinct empire with their ‘wet-dream’ fantasies of grandeur. Putting future nuclear disarmament into screeching reverse our current international commitment to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty would be abandoned with any pretense of a purely defensive motivation highly questionable. This unjustified and unprovoked unilateral turbocharging of the arms race obliterates our diplomatic trustworthiness globally just as we are seeking partners for new trade agreements. The US have rid themselves of their populist petulant child in the White House, but the UK is destined to endure decades of Tory Sovereign Dictatorship under a narcissistic tyrant and his Machiavelian side-kick Cummings. It is not too late to fight back; we must derail this deadly juggernaut with mass protests, Legal challenges, demanding a full Investigation into the Covert 2019 Rigged Election and all ongoing Tory corruption.

A few days ago I received this email from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. It said “Dear Friend, The Government has announced a 40% increase in Britain’s nuclear arsenal – I’m sure you’re as appalled by this news as I am. Today the arsenal stands at around 200 nuclear warheads, each about eight times the power of the Hiroshima bomb. How can Boris Johnson conceivably justify that arsenal, never mind increasing it? A key question being asked across media and parliament is: is it legal? The answer is a resounding No. Increasing Britain’s nuclear arsenal contravenes our legal obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Britain ratified in 1970. The NPT requires countries that have nuclear weapons to disarm, and those that don’t have them not to acquire them. There is no way in which increasing a nuclear arsenal is legitimate under the treaty.”

CND rightly insist that “Johnson’s decision to increase Britain’s nuclear arsenal is a serious problem. It’s not just that we would rather the money was spent on something more useful; or that this flagrant breach of the NPT may encourage others to pursue nuclear weapons; it’s a question of what kind of world we want to see, what role we want Britain to play and what it actually stands for. Rearming with weapons of mass destruction is not something that we can accept. I know that this is not the kind of world that you want. CND will be actively campaigning to stop this illegal action on the part of the Government. We’ll be calling on all our members to get active, lobby MPs and, when we can, collectively demonstrate to not only oppose this increase, but to stop Trident altogether.” They asked “Will you join CND and help us campaign for a nuclear-free world?”

The CND stance is supported in the London Economic Article entitled “Boris Johnson ‘in violation of international law’ with plan to build more nuclear warheads,” where Henry Goodwin lays out the facts saying that “Britain plans to increase the size of its nuclear stockpile by 40 percent, to 260 warheads, Johnson announced. Boris Johnson wants to increase the size of the UK’s nuclear weapons arsenal, a move which could amount to a violation of international law, campaigners and experts have warned. The government’s integrated defense review, published on Tuesday, revealed Britain would be increasing the size of its nuclear stockpile by 40 percent, to 260 warheads. The UK had previously committed to cutting its arsenal to 180 warheads by ‘the mid-2020s’, but the review said this stance would be changed ‘in recognition of the evolving security environment, including the developing range of technological and doctrinal threats’.”

Goodwin says “Johnson’s announcement comes despite the UK being a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which commits the government to gradual nuclear disarmament under international law. Successive administrations have stuck to the policy. Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project, said the UK’s plan was ‘deeply disappointing. ‘This will put Britain in violation of its Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Article 6 obligations,’ he said. Government ministers had publicly acknowledged, as recently as 2015, that cuts to the size of the country’s nuclear arsenal were part of its obligations under the treaty. Speaking at a United Nations conference in 2015, Baroness Anelay, a Foreign Office minister, said the UK ‘remains firmly committed to step-by-step disarmament, and our obligations under Article 6’. She suggested action would soon follow, including cutting “our total number of operationally available warheads to no more than 120” and reducing the ‘overall nuclear warhead stockpile to not more than 180 by the mid-2020s’.”

This sounds like more typical Tory double-speak like the copious boasts of ‘levelling up’ while in the blatantly obvious process of ‘Decimating Down’ targeting the working poor, disabled, vulnerable and disadvantaged. Goodwin reports that “Reacting to the new announcement, Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, said: ‘A decision by the United Kingdom to increase its stockpile of weapons of mass destruction in the middle of a pandemic is irresponsible, dangerous and violates international law. ‘While the British people are struggling to cope with the pandemic, an economic crisis, violence against women, and racism, the government chooses to increase insecurity and threats in the world. This is toxic masculinity on display. ‘While the majority of the world’s nations are leading the way to a safer future without nuclear weapons by joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, the United Kingdom is pushing for a dangerous new nuclear arms race’.”

Goodwin noted “In a further statement, the organization suggested that Britain would face censure at the upcoming NPT Review conference, which is due to take place at the United Nations in August. ‘The United Kingdom is legally obligated under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to pursue disarmament. States will meet soon to review the NPT’s success and when they do, the UK will have to answer for its actions,’ the statement said. Kate Hudson, the general secretary of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said: ‘A decision to increase Britain’s nuclear arsenal absolutely goes against our legal obligations under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. ‘Not only is the UK failing to take the required steps towards disarmament, it is willfully and actively embarking on a new nuclear arms race, at a time when Presidents Biden and Putin have renewed their bilateral nuclear reductions Treaty.”

Goodwin also quotes Hudson saying that “Britain must not be responsible for pushing the world towards nuclear war. This is a dangerous and irresponsible move, and must be reversed. Speaking ahead of the review’s release, Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, said increasing the stockpile was the ‘ultimate insurance policy’. Asked why the government wanted to end three decades of gradual disarmament, Raab said: ‘Because over time as the circumstances change and the threats change, we need to maintain a minimum credible level of deterrent’. Why? ‘Because it is the ultimate guarantee, the ultimate insurance policy against the worst threat from hostile states’.” Meanwhile the single most credible threat remains the potential for future global Pandemics, but this Tory Government have yet to admit and apologize for letting the most vital UK stockpile of PPE, in logical preparedness for the most serious threat that we faced as a nation, dwindle, abandoned and neglected till this vacant stockpile took 130,000 lives!

Goodwin says “The Scottish National Party, which is responsible for the territory where the arsenal is actually based, slammed the plans. Stewart McDonald, the party’s defense spokesperson, said it ‘beggars belief’ for ‘Boris Johnson to stand up and champion the international rules-based system before announcing in the same breath that the UK plans to violate its commitments to the international treaty on non-proliferation’. ‘Renewing Trident nuclear weapons was already a shameful and regressive decision, however, increasing the cap on the number of Trident weapons the UK can stockpile by more than 40 percent is nothing short of abhorrent,’ he added. ‘It speaks volumes of the Tory government’s spending priorities that it is intent on increasing its collection of weapons of mass destruction, which will sit and gather dust unless the UK has plans to indiscriminately wipe out entire populations, rather than address the serious challenges and inequalities in our society that have been further exposed by the pandemic’.”

A massive hornets nest erupted with another stunning Raab revelation featured in the HuffPost UK Article entitled “Exclusive: Raab Says UK Wants Trade Deals With Nations That Violate Human Rights.” Captured on record the “Foreign secretary told staff that ‘restricting’ trade because of human rights abuses would mean missing out on ‘growth markets’. Dominic Raab has told officials in a leaked video call that Britain will seek trade deals with countries around the world that violate international standards on human rights. The foreign secretary told staff in his department that only trading with countries that meet European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) standards would mean the UK missing out on trade with future ‘growth markets’.” Obviously our Fascist regime cannot afford to be too picky after ‘cutting off our nose to spite our face’ over Brexit. Atrocities be damned, Glow ball Britain will be rushing to fulfill the arms trade requirements of like-minded foreign despots from Saudi, to Israel to Turkey and beyond…

Reporting that “In a question and answer session with Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) staff, a recording of which has been heard by HuffPost UK, Raab said: ‘I squarely believe we ought to be trading liberally around the world. ‘If we restrict it to countries with ECHR-level standards of human rights, we’re not going to do many trade deals with the growth markets of the future’. HuffPost UK understands the foreign secretary also used the meeting to name countries where the UK had raised human rights issues with key trade partners. It is understood that Raab also said: ‘We don’t junk whole relationships because we’ve got issues, we have a conversation because we want to change the behavior and I think we’re in a much better position to do that if we’re willing to engage. I can think of behavior that would cross the line and render a country beyond the pale.”

Obviously sending in a specialized team to hack an outspoken journalist to bits in one of their foreign embassies didn’t quite cross the line as a human rights abuse. The UK will keep sending munitions to Saudi so that they can bomb innocent civilians and their young children, in Yemen into a previous century and starving their population into submission because it is too lucrative a trade deal to pass up. How does Raab plan to use trade as a bargaining chip to ‘modify’ the carnage in Yemen and take a strong stand against the embassy slaughter? There are now more authoritarian states than genuine democracies in the world, but far from setting an impressive human rights and diplomatic example the Tories are demonstrating their eagerness to join the rogue gallery with autocratic policies both at home and abroad and a decimation of our free speech, protest and legal protections being rammed through Parliament.

Raab has the background to know better, but HuffPost report he claims “Fundamentally I’m a big believer in engaging to try and exert positive influence even if it’s only a moderating influence, and I hope that calibrated approach gives you a sense that it’s not just words, we back it up with action.” HuffPost say that “Raab’s words came after the government published a major review of foreign policy, which includes plans for post-Brexit Britain to tilt towards the Indo-Pacific region as the world’s ‘geopolitical and economic center of gravity moves east. The increased focus on the region is an acknowledgment of Chinese influence, as well as the importance of countries including India and Japan. The shift will be underlined by the deployment of the HMS Queen Elizabeth carrier strike group to the region on its maiden operational mission later this year and a visit by Boris Johnson to India in April.” This is Johnson’s “let’s pretend we are a super power” imperialist bullshit bravado shining through to cloud common sense.

The HuffPost report that “The prime minister said Brexit marked a ‘new chapter in our history’ and the UK was now ‘open to the world, free to tread our own path’ as the integrated review of security, defense, development and foreign policy was published. Responding to Raab’s comments, Labour’s shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said it was the second time in as many weeks that ‘that the foreign secretary has exposed for talking up trade deals with countries that abuse human rights’. The Times reported last week that Raab had said the UK would be open to signing a future trade deal ‘with our Chinese friends’ at an event attended by senior Beijing diplomats. Nandy said: ‘This is the second time in as many weeks that the foreign secretary has exposed for talking up trade deals with countries that abuse human rights. “It is the latest example of a government entirely devoid of a moral compass and riddled with inconsistency, happy to say one thing in public and another behind closed doors?”

In an embarrassing exposure of Tory hypocrisy the HuffPost document Lisa Nandy’s rebuke “Today the prime minister stood up in parliament and lauded the UK’s commitment to defending human rights around the world. This afternoon, the foreign secretary is sending a very clear message to countries engaged in appalling human rights abuses that this government welcomes them with open arms’.” They say “Labour’s shadow trade secretary Emily Thornberry added: ‘Just weeks ago, Dominic Raab told Andrew Marr that Britain should not be doing trade deals with human rights abuses overseas. Now in private he says the government is prepared to sign trade deals with any country, even those violating the laws drawn up by British officials after the horrors of the Second World War. No wonder the government are talking up the prospects of deeper trade links with China in their integrated review and continuing to block the genocide amendment to the trade bill’.”

HuffPost report that “Amnesty International UK said Raab’s ‘shocking’ comments would ‘send a chill down the spine of embattled human rights activists right across the globe’, and that they fit ‘a depressing pattern on human rights from this government’. Its director Kate Allen said: ‘So-called ‘growth markets,’ countries like India, Indonesia or Brazil, are often precisely places where human rights protections are fragile and under threat. And in some countries such as Myanmar, the army has control of economic activity which directly funds its military operations, including those implicated in human rights abuses. ‘Trade that arises from or contributes to human rights violations can never be truly sustainable. Companies will rightly worry about their obligations to avoid involvement in human rights abuse, investors will take fright and the whole edifice will come tumbling down.”

HuffPost note that “An FCDO spokesperson claimed the audio had been “deliberately and selectively clipped to distort the foreign secretary’s comments’. They added: ‘As he made crystal clear in his full answer, the UK always stands up for and speaks out on human rights. ‘In his full answer, in an internal meeting, he highlighted examples where the UK has applied Magnitsky sanctions [sanctions to specific individuals and organizations rather than entire countries] and raised issues at the UN regardless of trade interests, and that this was a responsible, targeted and carefully calibrated approach to bilateral relations’. In a Commons statement on the integrated review, Johnson insisted the UK had led international condemnation of China’s alleged ‘mass detention’ of Uighur people in Xinjiang and its actions in Hong Kong. ‘There is no question China will pose a great challenge for an open society such as ours,’ Johnson said.”

HuffPost report the PM continued “But we will also work with China where that is consistent with our values and interests, including building a stronger and positive economic relationship and in addressing climate change.’ The plans for closer engagement with China were criticized by senior Tory MPs, who warned Johnson to avoid the ‘grasping naivety’ of the David Cameron years. Julian Lewis, chair of the intelligence and security committee of parliament, also suggested the impact of the economic closeness with China sought by Cameron and his chancellor George Osborne was still evident. Lewis said: ‘It’s suggested on pages 62-3 [of the review] that our adversary Communist China […] is an increasingly important partner in tackling global challenges like pandemic preparedness, if you please, and that we want deeper trade links and more Chinese investment in the UK. ‘Doesn’t that unfortunately demonstrate that the grasping naivety of the Cameron-Osborne years still lingers on in some departments of state’?”

According to HuffPost “During the statement, Johnson also faced opposition MPs shouting ‘genocide’ when he described China’s treatment of the Uighur people in Xinjiang as ‘mass detention’. Responding to Lewis, the PM said: ‘Those who call for a new Cold War on China or for us to sequester our economy entirely from China, which seems to be the new policy of the opposition, weaving as they generally do from one position to the next, are, I think, mistaken. ‘We have a balance to strike, we need to have a clear-eyed relationship with China. ‘Of course we’re protecting our critical national infrastructure and we’ll continue to do that. We will take tough measures, as I have said, to call out China for what they’re doing in Xinjiang.” The HuffPost Editor’s note: “This story was updated to include a statement from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and a fuller excerpt of the foreign secretary’s words to officials.”

So when Tories winge into their BBC mouthpiece or preach to the press about their inability to afford any more than a 1% pay rise for the Nurses they betrayed by depleting and abandoning our vital stockpile of PPE, challenge them by questioning the need to increase that other entirely unnecessary stockpile of deadly weapons that could extinguish all life on this planet. When they plead that only when the economic crisis is over can they restore the Foreign Aid Budget, remind them that they are breaking their manifesto commitment. But demand to know, why while reducing vital Aid to Yemen they cannot halt arms sales to the ruthless Saudi regime? Ask how at a time when it took a football hero’s persistent begging to secure funds to supply impoverished children with free school meals, they still managed to find such an obscene amount of spare cash to splash out on revamping their Downing Street briefing room to spout relentless propaganda supporting their warped Tory priorities? We must Get The Tories Out ASAP! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

While I am not so vindictive as to resent Prince Philip’s longevity, it would be refreshing to see our venerated queen show genuine empathy towards her most impoverished and downtrodden subjects. She might consider relinquishing just a little of the funding that bloats her royal privilege in order to rescue the destitute homeless who, on average, won’t survive beyond half the age of her dear husband! But Corporate Feudalism is driven from the very top with ‘the will of the people’ now inextricably subjugated by this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship; we still grovel to the monarch, jingoistically waving that blood-soaked flag of past empire in the desperate hope that Britania will once again ‘rule the waves,’ despite our pathetic drift into the stormy seas of the icy north Atlantic. How long before Boris Johnson’s ‘sunny uplands’ Brexit myth is shattered, his obscene corruption and relentless squandering of public funds exposed? That will depend on our courageous mass protests, legal challenges and Investigation of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election.

Our ageing Windsor is unlikely to yell ‘off with his head’ while Johnson remains firmly committed to her opulence. Royal compliance is paid for by loyal subjects, but the right to a political opinion is one of the small sacrifices the Queen must make in order to cling to her current lifestyle. Sorry if my failure to have sympathy for her majesty offends you, but this Tory Government just authorized the top-up of her profit margin millions to negate the impact Covid had on her unbridled wealth. The ‘Golden Ratchet’ prevailed while our NHS Nurses will be offered, well, rat-shit! Our long history of fealty to the Royals, noble gentry and the wealthy ruling elite persists despite centuries of exploitation as fundamentally nothing has changed: the robber Barrons will relentlessly steal from the poor! In the Byline Times Article entitled “Brexit has Revived the Power of the Unelected Aristocracy,” Sam Bright contends “David Frost’s latest promotion shows how the ‘democratic’ Brexit project has in fact emboldened unaccountable, hereditary power.”

Bright reminds us of that oft-repeated Brexit gripe: “The European Parliament is a Democratic Facade Dominated by Unelected Bureaucrats’. This was a headline carried by the influential Brexit Central blog on 7 May 2019, neatly capturing the attitude of Brexiters towards the European Union. Clogged with grey-faced public servants and disgraced former European leaders, the institutions of the EU are invisible and undemocratic” they claimed. “So a national endeavour was launched to liberate Britain from the yoke of European oppression and return power over ‘money, laws and borders’ to our national Parliament. Yet, in the infinity circle of irony that has consumed British politics, Brexit was forced through by Boris Johnson, a Prime Minister who ruled for months without winning an election, other than a Conservative leadership contest involving fewer than 150,000 people.”

Bright points out that “In office, Johnson’s agenda has largely been dictated by an unelected bureaucrat, Dominic Cummings, who lurked behind the pen name ‘senior Number 10 source’ for the 16 months that he served as a chief aide.” I am not convinced that Cummings was genuinely ousted from power when he very publically flounced out the front door of Number 10 carrying an empty cardboard box to face the barrage of press photographers. Who would be that keen to promote their own demise without cast-iron knowledge that the idiot ploy to fool the public would not be permitted to stymie excentric unfettered control of Government from a distance while maintaining a massive undeserved salary hike? I sincerely doubt that Cummings is gone; he’s just a less obvious presence among the unelected team of corrupt scoundrels dragging the UK into the gutter. He prides himself in accomplishing the theft of our votes with weapons-grade PsyOps and more; Cummings is still the grenade, oust him for real and we will pull that pin!

According to Bright “Even now that Brexit has been implemented, the future of the UK’s relationship is not in the hands of an elected representative of the people. On Wednesday, Johnson announced that David Frost, the bureaucrat who led the final stages of the UK’s negotiations with the EU, will be anointed as a Cabinet Minister and given responsibility for future arbitrations with Brussels.” He explains how “The quirk in the UK parliamentary system that has allowed Frost to become one of the most powerful people in Government, despite never having received a single vote, is the ability of House of Lords members to be appointed as ministers. Usually this is an anomaly, very occasionally the Government anoints someone to the House of Lords in order to make them a minister, leading to a swift media backlash. Yet Johnson’s administration has been uniquely enthusiastic about tasking unelected peers with running the country.” Sadly, the biased BBC and compliant Media have provided an obliging silence on this!

Bright claims that “This began after the 2019 General Election, when former Conservative MP Nicky Morgan was rapidly elevated to the red benches so that she could stay on as Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Secretary, while Johnson identified a replacement. At the same time, a peerage was given to Zac Goldsmith, who resoundingly lost his Richmond Park Commons seat at the same election. Goldsmith is a close ally of Johnson and his partner, Carrie Symonds, and has since taken up two ministerial roles.” He says “So this process has multiplied. There are currently 19 unelected ministers in the Government, spanning 17 departments. While it is common for House of Lords members to be appointed to Government departments, this is not universally the case, and the number of Lords ministers has increased in recent years.”

So we might ask, who are these UK Government’s unelected Ministers? Bright has presented us with a list of their names and where they are assigned starting with “Lord Frost’s powerful Brexit role. The rest of the formidable list includes: Baroness Evans – Cabinet Office & Lords; Lord Agnew – Cabinet Office & Treasury; Lord True – Cabinet Office; Lord Callanan ¬– Business; Lord Grimstone – Business & Transport; Baroness Barran – DCMS; Baroness Berridge – Education & Trade; Lord Gardiner – Environment; Lord Goldsmith – Environment & Foreign Office; Baroness Vere – Transport; Baroness Stedman-Scott – Work and Pensions; Lord Bethell – Health and Social Care; Lord Ahmad – Foreign Office; Baroness Williams – Home Office; Lord Greenhalgh – Home Office & Communities; Baroness Goldie – Defence; Lord Wolfson – Justice; Lord Stewart – Advocate General for Scotland.” All are unelected, entirely beholden to Boris Johnson and dedicated to supporting his Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

Bright reports that “Most of these ministers hold peripheral positions on paper, only Frost (when he is formally appointed) and Evans are invited to Cabinet meetings, yet they are tasked with carrying out duties of great national importance. This guarantees anonymity for the ministers, who glide unnoticed along the corridors of power while the media’s gaze is fixed on the House of Commons. Take Lord Bethell. If you presented Bethell’s portrait to an ordinary punter, they would likely shrug. Yet, in March 2020, he was appointed as the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department of Health and Social Care, responsible for the supply of COVID-19 medicines and testing equipment, overseeing the Test and Trace system, international health diplomacy, NHS cyber security, and a long list of other jobs. It is also not as though he has entirely escaped the controversies of the Coronavirus pandemic, either.” Why does opposition outrage demanding more scrutiny and greater accountability amount to barely a whimper?

Bright reminds us that “As revealed by Byline Times, Bethell met with David Meller, a serial Conservative Party donor, just a month before his firm, Meller Designs, was awarded a number of Government contracts worth more than £150 million. Bethell was joined at the meeting by Lord Andrew Feldman, the former chairman of the Conservative Party, who has reportedly been advising the Government on private sector procurement. Yet Bethell operates under the radar, almost entirely immune from public scrutiny or accountability. He has no constituents and is rarely questioned by the media. He answers only to the Prime Minister and the Health and Social Care Secretary, and his performance is checked by a small number of parliamentarians who know and care about his work. The irony is startling and the policy does not seem to be a coincidence.” Opposition MPs must demand full transparency!

Bright says that “Speaking in 2014, Cummings made a speech in which he called for the Prime Minister to recruit ministers ‘from wherever’ and ‘whack ‘em in the House of Lords’ so that they could assume Government jobs. Incapable of hearing an idea from Cummings without fawning at its brilliance, Johnson seems to have dutifully followed this playbook. An old Etonian who embodies the blissful nostalgia of a country guarded by the sword of a hereditary ruling class, Johnson has a predisposition to the idea of aristocratic governance and has applied the Cummings mantra. Brexit, which promised to reinvigorate national democracy, has thus fuelled the creeping revival of unelected, unaccountable power in Britain. Manifesting through the Coronavirus pandemic, this philosophy has seen huge public contracts awarded to chums of the regime, dispensing with the conviction, even if it was insincere, that our country is a meritocracy. ‘Global Britain’ is starting to look a lot like Victorian Britain.”

Theresa May had already appointed John Mann ‘anti-Semitism Tzar’ to head a government inquiry on an issue being manipulated to destroy the Labour Party. In the 2019 Dissolution Honours Boris Johnson appointed four of the most toxic former Labour MPs to join the ‘Vermin in Ermine’ in the House of Lords, essentially rewarding them with life peerages for their treachery towards Jeremy Corbyn! Kate Hoey became Baroness Hoey, of Lylehill and Rathlin in the County of Antrim; Ian Austin – Baron Austin of Dudley, of Dudley in the County of West Midlands; Rt. Hon. Gisela Stuart – Baroness Stuart of Edgbaston, of Edgbaston in the City of Birmingham and John Woodcock – Baron Walney, of the Isle of Walney in the County of Cumbria. All four Labour MPs had backed Johnson’s Brexit deal or endorsed the Tory Party in the election. Woodcock will not only sit as a ‘so-called’ non-affiliated life Peer in the Lords he has also been appointed to investigate ‘progressive extremism’ specifically targeting the progressive Labour left!

In an electoralreform.org Website Article entitled “Revealed: The true cost of Britain’s silent peer,” Jon Narcross points out that “There are many perks to being a member of the House of Lords. While many peers do work hard, it seems one of the perks is being able to claim expenses for doing very little. New research from the New Statesman has found that unelected peers are guilty of ‘expensive inaction’ by claiming thousands of pounds of taxpayers money to attend the Lords whilst barely contributing to votes or debates in the chamber. Analysis by the outlet, which builds on ERS research conducted in 2017, found that on average life peers claimed £20,935 from April 2019 to February 2020, while contributing to an average of just 12 debates and seven written questions. Despite claiming over £20,000 in allowances for attending the parliament, the average life peer voted just 23 times.”

Narcross highlights the fact that “The figures for hereditary peers, of which there are still over 90, shockingly, are similar. The average unelected aristocrat claims £20,604 over the 113-day period while speaking in an average of 10 or fewer debates, submitting six or fewer written questions, and voting just 22 times. Meanwhile, 140 eligible peers took part in no debates at all during this period, while voting less than 20% of divisions. For a third of the 140, there is no record of them voting at all. In total, 120 out of nearly 800 unelected Lords voted five times or fewer in this time period. Sadly, these statistics come as no surprise. In the 2016/17 session, the ERS found that 115 Lords, one in seven of the total, failed to speak at all, despite claiming an average of £11,091 each, while 18 peers failed to vote but still claimed £93,162.”

Narcross notes that “These new figures suggest the problem of ‘silent peers’ is only getting worse. The ERS has long highlighted the something-for-nothing culture in Britain’s upper house that leaves unelected Lords able to do as much or as little as they like, free from democratic scrutiny of voters who are unable to kick them out. Our supposed revising chamber is sinking with dead weight, and zero accountability, giving a bad name to those peers who the public might support. These figures suggest that Britain’s super-sized second chamber needs to be made far leaner, with dedicated scrutineers replacing the current expenses free-for-all. As it stands, the House of Lords is the biggest parliamentary chamber of any democracy and the world’s second-largest after the Chinese People’s Congress.” This obscenity makes an absolute mockery of our claim to an established democracy.

Narcross reports that “This year the Lords will swell to over 800 members with the creation of 36 new peerages announced by Boris Johnson on 31 July. The PM’s latest appointments have not come without controversy. The elevation of friends, supporters and political cronies, including his brother Jo Johnson, Evening Standard owner Evgeny Lebedev, former cricketer Ian Botham, and ex-Brexit Party MEP Claire Fox, are among the second-highest number of new peers created in over twenty years. Crucially, the move undoes all but undo the progress made to slim down the chamber to a more manageable size. The ERS estimates that these new peers alone are likely to cost taxpayers an additional £1.1m a year. Worse still, there could be more to come later this year, according to reports in Private Eye.” The public need to express their outrage over this massive waste of taxpayer funds.

Narcross insists that “At a time when there is plenty to scrutinise, ostensibly the upper chamber’s role, the time for piecemeal reform is long over. Voters deserve a revising chamber that is fit for purpose. We cannot again sit through another round of Lords appointees and see the already bloated chamber continue to be stuffed with political cronies and party donors. We need action now. Let’s move to a slimmed-down, elected chamber for the nations and regions. With proportional representation and a clear remit, we can get the scrutiny body we need. Only once we’ve done that can we finally get this house in order.” I wrote of my input on this “Peers should be put forward for nomination based on their service to the community and valued specialist knowledge, but not necessarily tagged to a particular constituency. Philanthropy should be judged relevant only as a major percentage of personal wealth, but excluding political party donations. You might see Lord Jamie Oliver and Lord Marcus Rashford voted in by the people!”

In a piece “based on the introduction to a new book from Open Labour and Politics for the Many,” Tessa Milligan & Nancy Platts contribute to the Labour List Article entitled “Democracy is in retreat here in the UK. How should Labour respond?” They say that “The past year has shown the state’s capacity to swing towards the kind of cronyism beloved of authoritarian regimes. We have a government club with a VIP guest list, used as the basis for handing out contracts, favours and honours. Public procurement becomes a fast-tracked operation for friends, family and donors. We see clampdowns on protest, and plans to warp the voting system for police and crime commissioners and mayors. While Dominic Raab warns that ‘democracy is in retreat worldwide’, we need to look closer to home.” UK democracy has been obliterated by this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship: we must act now!

Labour List report that “We face all manner of disasters that force us to re-examine the role of the state and whether it is fit for purpose. From a deadly pandemic to financial turmoil and the brutal effects of climate change, we have become increasingly aware of the power of our communities in rising to the challenge, taking action and protecting each other, and the limitations of the state in its current form to do the same. The political project of the right in recent years has been about exploiting the feeling of a lack of control over our lives and using it to usher in sweeping ideological changes which exacerbate these concerns rather than address them, using a rhetoric that puts the blame on ‘others’. For the left, the response must be about giving a voice to the diverse communities which make up our society, empowering people in their places of work, addressing inequality and strengthening rights and freedoms to give all of us greater personal stability.”

Labour List say “That means a progressive government needs to reimagine the role of the modern state. Central to what we are about is shaking off the dead hands and drag anchors keeping us down and holding us back as individuals, as communities, and as the nations and regions which make up the UK. The task is to take control from warped institutions of government today, and unleash personal and political empowerment built on inclusion, equality, democracy and accountability. The labour and trade union movement has always led demands for greater democracy, empowering working people and communities, and offering a different vision of society. Today, a reimagined state is central to revitalising and rebuilding our country, and it is an urgent task.” Sadly this grand vision is sabotaged by Captain of Capitulation Keir Starmer whose gross manipulations of leadership control undermines our solidarity and has provided a Trojan horse for the Tories in their quest to destroy the Progressive Socialist Left in British politics.

I think the Labour Party is stymied until it removes Starmer! According to Labour List “Young people in the UK see too many old institutions that were not fit for the last century never mind this century. Instead, the state exists in a transformed world with huge technological advancements, but it is built upon a creaking democratic structure, and institutions that are only marginally tweaked from their 18th-century versions. This argument is at the core of The New Foundations, a book released for free this Sunday from Open Labour and Politics for the Many: we have democratic, financial and state institutions that are not fit for purpose. The inequality and exclusions which come with them are not unfortunate and unavoidable flaws, they are hard-wired in. The effort to undo them, to open up, will be an uphill struggle. A quick makeover or replacing a few bricks in the crumbling edifice won’t do. To build a better society, we will need wide-ranging and fundamental change, not just defending democracy but transforming it.”

Labour List warn “There will be opposition. Just as the flaws are built-in, so are the defensive barriers, because these institutions were not designed to represent everybody fairly. Instead, they were built to defend a particular group or groups of interests and they will fight like hell to keep doing so, as we’ve only too clearly this month. Real democracy and electoral reform should be a breath of fresh air to tired state institutions: shifting the culture towards bridge-building, rather than divide-and-conquer tactics. As Jess Garland and Willie Sullivan observe in their contribution to this volume, Westminster’s minority-rule electoral system is simply not designed to govern the kind of diverse, and over recent years, increasingly divided, country that the UK has become. As a result, Westminster is increasingly incapable of producing governments underpinned by genuine electoral legitimacy.”

Labour List rightly point out that “The divide between the government and the governed is getting starker by the day. Parliament’s own legitimacy was battered by years of Brexit stalemate, revealing the vulnerability and weaknesses of our largely unwritten constitution and making the foundations of our politics look ever more fragile. Growing mistrust of politics and politicians is opening the door to a resurgent authoritarian right and this poses a huge problem for a Labour Party trying to enthuse voters with a positive vision for change. This is the context for this collection of new essays. Its primary focus is not on the nuts and bolts of an agenda for democratic reform, although the authors put forward many ideas. Instead, it shows how this agenda is inseparable from Labour’s wider aspirations to transform the country. Sign up to receive The New Foundations for free. The book will be launched at Open Labour conference on Sunday at 7pm. LabourList readers can use the discount code LabourlistOL21.”

The very highest priority for the Labour Party right now is to replace their toxic Leadership ASAP before the progressive Socialist Left of the party is completely annihilated, by the dysfunctional, undemocratic, interventions of Trojan horse Keir Starmer. The damage started with not just accepting the unfathomable result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election unchallenged, but bending over backwards to try to construct a valid reason for this blatantly corrupt result. This was accomplished by demonizing Jeremy Corbyn and crediting the working poor with total idiocy in support the Tories after having suffered a decade of austerity knowing they were voting to have their children starve. This is simply not credible and we should demand a full Investigation into the fraudulent result and the multiple instances of corruption and squandering of public funds that have ensued since. Authoritarian regimes endure for decades so we must take to the streets on mass to protest loudly now to derail and remove this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. DO NOT MOVE ON

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Desperate to paint all protesters as violent extremists I believe the far-right were just enlisted to initiate violence in the progressive Socialist stronghold of Bristol. In the London Economic Article entitled “Reaction as ‘Kill the Bill’ protest turns violent,” Jack Peat reports on the “Protests against anti-protest measures turned ugly in Bristol last night. Violent scenes which marred a ‘Kill the Bill’ protest in Bristol that saw a police station attacked, officers injured and vehicles set alight have been widely condemned. Home Secretary Priti Patel branded the scenes ‘unacceptable’ and said ‘thuggery and disorder’ would never be tolerated. Bristol mayor Marvin Rees, who said he had ‘major concerns about the Government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, condemned the thuggery but said the disorder would be used to justify the legislation. Freedom to protest is fundamental to democracy’ Mass gatherings are currently banned under coronavirus legislation and anyone breaching the regulations could be fined.”

Peat reports that “‘Many who attended the protest on College Green were wearing face masks and carried placards, saying: ‘Say no to UK police state’ and ‘Freedom to protest is fundamental to democracy’ and ‘Kill the Bill’. What started as a non-violent demonstration on Sunday afternoon turned violent after hundreds of protesters descended on the New Bridewell police station. Two police officers were injured, suffering broken ribs and an arm, and taken to hospital during violent skirmishes with masked thugs. Later, protesters attempted to smash the windows of the glass-fronted police station. They also tried to set fire to one of the marked police vans parked outside the station but the small flames were quickly extinguished by riot officers. Other protesters set fire to a police van parked on Bridewell Street, near to the police station. Rioters smashed the windows of the police station and also destroyed Avon and Somerset Police vehicles parked nearby, setting fire to a car and a van.”

Peat points out that “Cars parked in a multi-storey car park adjacent to the police station were also damaged by protesters. Avon and Somerset Police said its officers had missiles and fireworks thrown at them and used mounted officers and dogs to disperse the mob. The mindless violence was condemned by the Home Secretary, police federation representatives and local leaders. Home Secretary Priti Patel tweeted: ‘Unacceptable scenes in Bristol tonight. ‘Thuggery and disorder by a minority will never be tolerated. Our police officers put themselves in harm’s way to protect us all. My thoughts this evening are with those police officers injured’.” What luck! This was just the kind of violent scene Patel wanted to ram through her draconian legislation.

Bristol was the perfect place to infiltrate a peaceful protest. Peat notes that Bristol Mayor Marvin Rees said: “I have major concerns about the Bill myself, which is poorly thought out and could impose disproportionate controls on free expression and the right to peaceful protest. ‘Smashing buildings in our city centre, vandalising vehicles, attacking our police will do nothing to lessen the likelihood of the Bill going through. ‘On the contrary, the lawlessness on show will be used as evidence and promote the need for the Bill. This is a shameful day in an incredible year for Bristol. We have faced times of great confrontation particularly surrounding Black Lives Matter and the events that followed. ‘We have had numerous protests. Our police, city representatives and I have been able to point out with pride that we have faced these moments of conflict without the physical conflict that others have experienced. ‘Those who decided to turn the protest into a physical confrontation and smash our city have robbed us of this’.”

Citing the “Right to protest” Peat reports that “Reaction elsewhere has been divided, with Ash Sarkar saying ‘if the government wants people to protest peacefully then they shouldn’t push through measures which would criminalise peaceful protest’.” Jake Hanrahan added that “if this happened in a foreign country the British press would frame it as a revolt against brutal measures brought in by a hardline government, Instead the clashes are ‘disgraceful’. What’s disgraceful is how staggeringly authoritarian the bill is. #killthebill” Our most serious problem remains that the majority of the British public still fail to recognize that the UK has rapidly descended into a repressive authoritarian police state. The extent of the brutality of our far-right fascist regime is evidenced by the glaringly obvious statistic, exposing the horrific death tolls directly caused by Tory austerity, poverty and only now Covid 19.

But Peat did note that “There was widespread condemnation of the minority who hijacked the situation for their own aims.” John Apter Tweeted: “This is not about protecting the right to protest, it’s violent criminality from a hardcore minority who will hijack any situation for their own aims. My colleagues, some of whom are now in hospital face the brunt of that hatred. Thoughts remain with my colleagues. #Bristol Such as this familiar face:” There was report on Politics Live of a Tory MP claiming that such controversial legislation was introduced to deliberately stir-up trouble; if true it has certainly worked out well for this toxic regime. In a bewildered response to: Nigel Farage Tweeting: “In Bristol tonight we see what the soft-headed approach to the anti-police BLM leads to. Wake up everyone, this is not about racial justice. These people want all-out anarchy and street violence,” Alex Beresford Tweeted: “Sorry what has BLM got to do with the scenes in Bristol today?” No Nigel, the far-right want to precipitate violence, stir-up racial tensions and social unrest: it’s all part of their ruthless ‘divide and conquer’ strategy.

In the Byline Times Article entitled “Peaceful Protests have Shaped Democracy We Must Do Everything we can to Protect Them,” Dr Meenal Viz makes a strong case for not allowing this Government to silence protest. They say “With a Government crackdown on protests to be voted on imminently, frontline NHS doctor Meenal Viz explores how powerful taking a stand can be in speaking truth to power and enacting change.” Dr Viz says “Last April, I was faced with a stark choice. As a doctor who was six months pregnant, I was forlorn. Just minutes from where I lived in Luton, Mary Agyapong had died. Mary was a pregnant nurse and died in the same hospital where she worked. She never got to meet her newborn daughter. Echoing my own experience, Mary’s concerns about working while pregnant during the pandemic had not been heard, and now she had no voice. I did not want to become another statistic and so I felt I needed to take drastic action. Peaceful protests are the common man’s conduit to power.”

Dr Viz says “When routine escalation fails and bureaucracy obstructs, one of our last remaining options is to press a hard reset on the system. Pressure needs to be exerted on decision-makers, who are increasingly obsessed with focus groups and social media analytics. We shouldn’t have to fight for the right to protest in a functioning democracy and a clampdown on protests is ample evidence that our democracy is not functioning. In the absence of powerful contacts, PR firms and media managers, I knew that I had to create an image that would resonate with the public, iconic enough to empower pregnant women across the world and encourage them to stand up for their rights. I knew that I would be the first person to protest during lockdown and that in itself entailed a great deal of personal and professional risk. There was great ambiguity about the laws surrounding protest, just as there was great ambiguity about the status of pregnant healthcare workers.”

“I was acutely aware that the Government’s instructions were to stay at home,” Viz says “I knew that the situation for pregnant healthcare workers was untenable and that the system’s inertia would put myself and colleagues at risk before a decision was made. A week after Mary died, I drove to London. I planned for every eventuality. My hunch was that the Government was already trying to stifle communication from healthcare workers as I was already aware of several colleagues who had been issued with eerily similar not-so-veiled threats about social media posts and media appearances. It is a system which tried to silence the truth, and this systematic suppression of voices is what causes people to mobilise. Protest does not happen in a vacuum; it is a symptom of systemic failures. On that Sunday morning, my bamboo sign was recyclable, my scrubs were reusable, and my cloth mask was washable. I had written my husband’s phone number on my arm in case I was arrested. I rehearsed my lines, but didn’t get much further than ‘I’m pregnant’ and pointing to my belly.”

Dr Viz claims she “Only tipped off a trusted journalist minutes before my arrival because I was certain that, if Downing Street’s communications team was made aware of my protest, it would use every avenue, including the police, to discredit and discourage me. I marched down Whitehall by myself, we are allowed one hour of daily exercise, after all, officer, and positioned myself outside the gates of Downing Street for one hour. There, I reflected and I meditated in total silence. It was a pleasant spring morning and I spent much of my time admiring the sun-kissed cherry blossom. Mine was a silent protest, but it was a silence that I chose, in stark contrast to the draconian communications policies being imposed upon doctors. It was not lost upon me that I was a single person and, standing behind the Downing Street gates, were the usual number of armed policemen. (The policemen were all unfailingly polite during my protest and, as I left, I thanked them for allowing me to protest without disturbance).”

Dr Viz says “The next morning, I was shocked to see that my picture had made the front pages of both The Times and the Telegraph. It had reached a worldwide audience with The New York Times and further syndication across the world. In one hour of silent protest, I had achieved what I had tried to do through months of escalation to no avail. I received a phone call from hospital management, advising me that I could now work from home. Ultimately, my protest gained mainstream political support and helped to shape policy to protect healthcare workers during the pandemic. One silent protest served to give a voice to many. Later in the year, I was also invited to advise some Black Lives Matter protests in the UK. During a pandemic, safety protocols are paramount and I was pleased to be able to help create practical and innovative solutions to allow safe environments for peaceful protest.”

Dr Viz understands that “Some will argue that, due to COVID-19 restrictions, all mass gatherings are currently illegal and that protests should not be excepted. While recognising this concern, we must note that issues such as structural racism are also a public health crisis. It was therefore disheartening to see that the Metropolitan Police refused to allow permission for a peaceful vigil to take place in Clapham Common on Saturday evening, in the wake of the murder of Sarah Everard. Instead of allowing the vigil to be observed and allowing the crowds to disperse naturally, police were seen to be using force against those who attended. This comes within a concerning context of the Government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, a law which seeks to criminalise the more trivial aspects of protest.” This Tory Government crackdown is proof positive of just how effective our protests are, but we must be vigilant to ensure that far-right infiltrators do not spark violence and vandalism to negate our message.

Dr. Viz warns that “If this bill is passed, a protestor could be banned if a person comes to harm as a result of ‘serious distress, serious annoyance, serious inconvenience or serious loss of amenity’. The penalty would be up to 10 years in prison and/or a fine. Worryingly, a crime could be committed by a protestor even if a person is merely at risk of suffering from serious annoyance as a result. You can be certain that the first protestor found guilty of causing harm as a result of serious annoyance is going to have to pay his fine to The Ministry of Silly Walks. By their very nature, protests are not meant to make everyone in the room happy. They are designed to disrupt the status quo. Throughout history, attempts to ban low-key peaceful protests have almost always resulted in accelerant being poured on a fire that might have otherwise burned out by itself. It could be that, in trying to limit the scope of protests, the Government will motivate a new generation of protestors to take to the streets.”

In the Canary Article entitled “MPs and campaigners demand the home secretary stops police clamping down on protest,” they note that “Campaigners, MPs, and peers have written to home secretary Priti Patel. They’re calling for changes to coronavirus (Covid-19) legislation to allow for protests to take place during lockdown.” They insist on “Protecting the right to protest. The letter was organised by Liberty and Big Brother Watch. It calls on the home secretary to provide guidance for police on how to facilitate protests during the pandemic. And it also asks for clarity around laws on the right to protest. The letter emphasises that protest is a human right. This comes ahead of further ‘Kill the Bill’ protests to challenge the government’s draconian Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. The protests are due to take place nationwide on 20 and 21 March.”

“MPs from various parties have signed the letter. However, the Canary say that Network for Police Monitoring co-ordinator Kevin Blowe highlighted that the Tory MPs who signed the letter previously voted for the bill which proposes to ‘clamp down on protest’: Note: the Tory MPs who signed the letter, Baker, Chope, Fuller, Green and Mitchell, all voted for the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. https://t.co/HOLcwdCyF8 – Kevin (Aggravated Activist) Blowe (@copwatcher)” This is obviously a Tory Government attempt to ban protests, they say “Earlier in March, campaigners tried to secure exemption from lockdown legislation to attend a vigil commemorating Sarah Everard. The judgement handed down suggested ‘that the human rights of expression and gathering might be considered reasonable excuses in some circumstances’. But police still proceeded to harass and arrest vigil attendees. Big Brother Watch director Silkie Carlo said:”

The Canary report on “The harrowing scenes of police officers using force against women at Clapham Common recently were avoidable and wrong. Over the past week, many more demonstrators and even legal observers have been arrested or fined. This stain on our democracy is a direct consequence of this government’s disrespect for the most basic of British democratic freedoms. Sam Grant from Liberty added: Last week, the police conceded protest is not banned under the lockdown regulations, but used them to threaten then arrest demonstrators anyway. The home secretary must immediately issue guidance to all police forces to ensure socially distanced protests can go ahead and create an explicit exemption for protest in the current regulations.” General perception of the disproportionate use of force caused a public outcry and severe embarrassment to the MET. I wouldn’t rule out Tories recruiting thugs to spark a violent attack on police in Bristol in an attempt to rebalance opinion in favour of a crackdown!

Yes the Tories are that untrustworthy and devious; for Boris this is all about the optics as Johnson knows he can rely on the BBC to spin this latest incident to overwhelm previous bad press and support the growing authoritarianism of his crooked cabal. The Canary say that “Doughty Street Chambers barrister Adam Wagner highlighted, as set out in the judicial review, that any police force with a blanket ban on all protest would be acting unlawfully.” Adam Wagner Tweeted: “Mr Justice Holgate’s judgment in the @ReclaimTS Judicial Review interim hearing from last Friday has been published. Paragraph 24 is key and couldn’t be clearer. Any police force with a policy which bans all protest would be acting unlawfully https://judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl” Netpol Tweeted: “This is Wiltshire’s Chief Constable, not knowing that the clear duty to facilitate protests has not been suspended or that Mr Justice Holgate’s judgment in the @ReclaimTS case says any police force with a policy that bans all protest would be acting unlawfully.”

The Canary report that “Statements from the Metropolitan police, London mayor Sadiq Khan, and Wiltshire’s police constable are not in line with Holgate’s judgement: Wiltshire News Tweeted: During ‘normal’ times we have a very clear duty to facilitate legal and peaceful protest, but the covid-19 legislation has enforced a ban on large gatherings’ Kier Pritchard: Working hard to build confidence in county police force https://ift.tt/3lwvfSA. The letter to the home secretary states: The absence of clear guidance on these issues has created an entirely unsatisfactory situation, which has persisted to varying degrees for almost a year now. The police have no legal certainty as to their duties and powers, protestors have no legal certainty as to their rights, and there is inconsistent application of the Regulations across the country. This cannot continue.”

Describing the lack of clarity Canary say that “Netpol suggested that the confusion created by ‘state-of-emergency laws and enforcement’ is ‘a very effective way of making people fearful about exercising’ their rights:” Netpol Tweeted: “The absence of clear guidance on these issues has created an entirely unsatisfactory situation… protestors have no legal certainty as to their rights, and there is inconsistent application of the Regulations across the country” “It is underappreciated how state-of-emergency laws and enforcement is intended to create uncertainty about our rights: it’s a very effective way of making people fearful about exercising them. This is also true of continually introducing more and new public order laws” The Home Office responded to the joint letter, saying: ‘While we are still in a pandemic we continue to urge people to avoid mass gatherings, in line with wider coronavirus restrictions.’ The Home Office also confirmed that stay at home regulations will remain in place until 29 March.”

In the Canary Article entitled “‘Kill the Bill’ protests are happening across the country this weekend,” they warned ahead of time of the public backlash against “The bill saying that “The Tory government’s authoritarian Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill will not only clamp down on protest but will also target marginalised communities, criminalising the Gypsy and Romany Traveller (GRT) community and introducing more stop and search powers. As the call to action from Cornwall explains: The new bill gives the police more power to impose conditions on a protest, including ones they view as too noisy… and it’s not just protest. The bill will make trespass an offence, criminalising Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. It introduces new stop and search powers that will increase racial profiling and harassment.”

“The Canary warned earlier this week that: The Bill will ban protests that block roads around Parliament. It also allows the police to impose conditions on one-person protests. And it will introduce a new offence, punishable by up to ten years in prison, of ‘public nuisance’ for actions that cause ‘serious distress’, ‘serious annoyance’, ‘serious inconvenience’. Yes, that’s right. If you cause serious annoyance on a protest, you could go to jail for a decade! Oh, and then there’s the ten year sentences for damaging a memorial or statue. Yep, you could get a longer sentence for damaging an inanimate object than the average sentence given to rapists. As a result, a coalition of groups is coming together to oppose the bill. Sisters Uncut have led the charge against the bill and in women’s demonstrations. In a press release, an anonymous member urged supporters to keep up the pressure.”

The Canary note that “The last week has shown that protest works. That’s why they want to ban it, and that’s why we’re fighting back. The coalition that is coming together shows just how many people are angry about the brutal reality of policing in this country, and who are determined to roll back this dangerous extension of state power. Saturday night has shown us that the police are drunk on power, and should not be rewarded with more. Policing by consent is a story this country likes to tell about itself. The reality is that policing is unaccountable, aggressive and violent. Targets of police repression, working-class people, racial minorities, sex workers and many others, have had enough.” They listed the weekend protest against the bill held in: Liverpool; Bristol; Manchester, Cornwall, Truro; Newcastle; London (Deptford); Plymouth; Brighton; Cardiff; Birmingham; Sheffield; London, New Cross; Despite all but one of these protests proceeding peacefully; only the violence in Bristol made the BBC News agenda.

The Canary say “News that the bill has been delayed is welcome and a victory. But the battle is far from over and everyone still needs to take urgent action to ensure this repressive bill doesn’t become law.” Priti Patel was so ‘seriously annoyed by Extinction Rebellion protests that she broke a fingernail rapping on her desk in a fit of peak; she wants protesters thrown in jail for inflicting such serious distress! This is the Tory ‘mountain out of molehill’ rant to strip away our civil rights and lock up all outspoken activists as criminals in their repressive authoritarian dystopian nightmare scenario of ‘new normal.’ We should never have allowed the Tories to seize control unchallenged in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, but it is not too late to demand a full Investigation of the result, along with the numerous corrupt abuses of power and squandering of public funds that have occurred since. In a functioning democracy such an extreme and relentless level of corruption would have seen the leadership team in jail not rewarded with office! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

What didn’t we hear about from our once trusted public broadcaster the BBC? Few were reporting the hugely successful peaceful protests being held up and down the country this past weekend, but they were well attended. The Tory mouthpiece was primed and ready to focus on the violence and apportion all the blame on protesters, but I was immediately suspicious. In the Canary Article entitled “As the media fixates on Bristol, don’t forget thousands took to the streets this weekend to #KillTheBill, they note that “As the controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts bill languishes in the committee stage, an increasing number of people have shown their opposition to the legislation. But while the escalation at the Bristol protest has dominated the headlines, let’s not forget that thousands of people took to the streets to protest the bill across the country at the weekend. The bill will give the police increased powers to impose conditions on protests as well as criminalising Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities.”

The Canary report from around the country starting in Birmingham where they say “Hundreds of people showed up to support the right to protest in Birmingham. Demonstrators socially distanced as they gathered at Victoria Square in the city.” Alice Matthews Tweeted: “Amazing turnout in Birmingham today to #KillTheBill and defend our right to protest. Everyone who came showed WM police, the PCC candidates and BCC: we won’t be ruled by fear. We’re policed by consent, & can remove consent. There is no place for police brutality in Birmingham.” Sean Farmelo Tweeted pictures: “Very proud to see numbers out for the #killthebill protest in Birmingham. Tories want to push it into the long grass but that won’t happen. We are organised and against it!”

The Canary reported that in Brighton “Over a thousand people joined a march against the bill in Brighton on Saturday 20 March. The protesters gathered at around 2pm and marched through the streets, disrupting some bus services and traffic. After hearing speeches, protesters moved through the city, raising chants such as ‘we will not be silenced’. The demonstrators reportedly started heading home after 4pm, after a peaceful march.” Joyce Stack Tweeted: “Well done #Brighton. #KillTheBill,” as Will Flockton Tweeted a Video: “#KillTheBill protest in #Brighton. Easily 1000 people.”

The Canary account of what occurred in Bristol exposes a different picture recorded both in pictures and in several pieces of video footage. They say that “The protest against the bill in Bristol has been widely reported, after some protesters set police cars on fire. Seven arrests have already been made. Prior to this, and until the police moved in, the demonstration which began on College Green, had been peaceful.” Billy Stockwell tweeted a Video: “Police using batons on #KILLTHEBILL protesters outside Bristol Police Station. @EpigramPaper.” Alon Aviram Tweeted two Videos: “People sitting down now outside Bristol’s central police station. Shields and horses out. Hundreds still lining the streets as night descends. #killthebill,” and “Backup arrives and the flames go higher #killthebill #bristol”

The Canary say that in Leeds “Hundreds of people gathered in the centre of Leeds on Sunday to protest the legislation. Outside the Civic Hall, protesters listened to speeches and poems. As reported by the Yorkshire Evening Post, One speaker said: Throughout history many significant improvements have been gained through protest. We have stood collective in our fight of injustice many times before. It is our time to make history and fight for improvements for our children and grandchildren. They are already fighting climate change and we need to give them the tools to do that and the democratic right to protest is one of them. This Bill is impacting on our freedoms and we shall not let it pass. Make no mistake, this Bill comes from a place of fear. They are frightened of our collective action and they should be. We are so powerful when we come together and they know it.”

Haikool included a telling picture of all the cardboard Protest signs laid out on the ground in front of Civic Hall when the protest ended when the Tweet was posted: “Fight the power. #KilltheBill #BlockTheBill #Leeds.” By all accounts ‘Fight the power’ was a fight-free peaceful protest. George Aylett Tweeted: “Not only does the Policing Bill limit our fundamental right to protest but it also essentially criminalises the GRT community just for existing. A socially distant and mask-wearing crowd in Leeds says #KillTheBill to protect our right to protests and stand against antiziganism,” and also included a Video: “Chants of ‘Kill The Bill’ in Leeds. A huge spirit of solidarity here. #KillTheBill”

Without further information regarding Police intervention the Canary report that in Liverpool “Two people were arrested at a protest against the bill in Liverpool on Saturday that attracted a large crowd.” Paul McGowan 4 Young Labour LGBT+ Officer included a Video in his Tweet saying that: “I was proud to support yesterday’s protest in Liverpool against the controversial Police, Crime, Courts and Sentencing Bill. We have to oppose the #PoliceCrackdownBill every step of the way, in Parliament in the courts, and in the streets.” Cinderella also Tweeted a Video: “Protest in Liverpool #killthebill”

The Canary say that in Manchester “Thousands of demonstrators chanted ‘kill the bill’ as they took to the streets of Manchester on Saturday. Protester Anna Preston told the Manchester Evening News: We’re just angry and upset like everyone else. It’s the fact that the whole society we live in seems violent, particularly towards women of colour and disabled women. It’s getting worse. I wanted to come out as a tribute to the women who are murdered and assaulted. Protesters said demonstrations would continue until they were successful in stopping the bill’s process through parliament.” Lauren Tweeted: “Tonight’s protest in Manchester #killthebill,” while Joe White included a Video: “Still loads here at #killthebill Manchester.” Sisters Uncut Tweeted: “In Manchester, our Sisters organised a demo for all those affected by state end gendered violence, and to demand that no more power be given to police. #KillTheBill We will not be silenced by state violence. #KillTheBill”

The Canary reported that in Newcastle “Three people were arrested at a Sunday demonstration that attracted around 600 people. One of the arrested protesters was photographed being pinned to the ground by multiple officers.” It’s important to understand that in the vast majority of situations there is no legitimate necessity to pin anyone to the ground; this is done to unarmed protesters to intimidate and humiliate them; it has killed victims in the past! “Protesters marched through the streets of Newcastle under heavy police presence. They called for the freedom to protest and an end to gendered violence.” Sol Gamsu Tweeted: “Big #killthebill demo in #Newcastle. Probably 1000 ppl- young, energetic & angry. Heavily policed- sending riot police into a park when things clearly calm & peaceful? Anyone wanting to leave flowers would’ve had to go thru line of heavy-duty men in riot gear- not a good look.” Yash included a Video in her Tweet: “amazing turnout in Newcastle today for the #reclaimourstreets #killthebill protest. feeling empowered.”

The Canary say that in Truro “Police monitored a peaceful protest against the bill in Truro in Cornwall attended by more than 200 demonstrators. The Resist G7 Coalition, who organised the protest said: We made it clear: The Cornish community stands against the government’s push towards authoritarianism. We can’t thank you enough. To those that came today and those that watched and shared from home, you did this. It is your continued support that grows this movement. It is your commitment to determined actions which will help us kill this bill. The streets are where we won our rights, and the streets are how we keep them. Do not let this inept government throw away your democratic freedoms.” Amy Slack Tweeted: “Kill the #PoliceCrimeSentencingCourtsBill. We have the right to peaceful protest. This bill completely undermines our rights. #KillTheBill #Truro.”

Emily Apple Tweeted: “So inspiring to see hundreds taking to the streets to #KillTheBill in Truro today. Cornwall is rising. And so is the rest of the country. Solidarity to all resisting the #PoliceCrackdownBill this weekend.” The response in Truro will seriously alarm the authorities now that they have forced the local community to accept the unwanted incursion of the G7 Summit. Boris Johnson’s decision to bring the G7 summit to one of the most severely deprived areas of the entire country demonstrates his extreme disconnect with the realities faced by our rapidly expanding working poor. To make situations worse in Cornwall numerous local properties have been bought as second homes, buy to let or vacation lets, making the housing market completely unaffordable to local people. There are limited plans to build social housing and the rental costs are high; so G7 just throws salt into a gaping wound.

Thankfully the situation in Wales did not spark any violence in Cardiff, according to the Canary, despite recent protests against police brutality towards a man who died while in police custody there were no major incidents reported. They Canary say that “Similarly, Saturday saw several protests against the bill in Wales. The largest was in Cardiff, but demonstrators also turned out in Bangor and Wrexham. In Wrexham, the demonstrators marched to lay their placards at MP Sarah Atherton’s office. Bangor saw protesters hold a minute of silence to ‘honour the sisters we have lost’ and lay flowers of remembrance.” Me thinks it is hard for a Police Officer to justify beating someone or wrestling them to the ground and piling in on top of them if they are carrying a bunch of flowers. What could they say in Court? The protestor was carrying a weapon; we were in fear of being injured by the protestor hurling a dangerous projectile bunch of daffodils? Armed with just flowers the police excuse for resorting to violence evaporates.

The Canary reported that “People in Cardiff have been protesting against South Wales police since Mohamud Hassan died in January after being held overnight in police custody. Four police officers have been served misconduct notices in relation to his death.” Pictures from the Welsh protests including a video were Tweeted by Voice.Wales: “People march through Cardiff chanting against Home Secretary Priti Patel, in a protest today against the Tory Police and Crime Bill.” Another highlighted: “The large demonstration is now heading down Bute St chanting ‘No Justice, No Peace, No Racist Police.” SUTR Wales Tweeted: “Cardiff Reclaims The Streets #WorldAgainstRacism #TakeTheKnee #KillTheBill @AntiRacismDay @CardiffSutr”

Reporting on “A country-wide movement” the Canary post a Link to “A petition against the Bill now has almost 200,000 signatures, meaning it will be debated in parliament. With more protests planned over the coming weeks, the number of people against this bill could not be clearer. With the bill still in parliament, we must continue to fight for our right to protest.” Sisters Uncut Tweeted: “From Manchester to London, through Bristol and Leeds, the past week has seen a mass uprising against the #PoliceCrackdownBill. We’re proud to be part of the movement to #KillTheBill. Whether you’ve been out on the streets or protesting from home, we see you. And we will win.”

In the Canary Article entitled “You might want to check your privilege before condemning the Bristol riot,” they question those condemning the protesters. “As events in Bristol unfolded on 21 March, and as police vehicles burned, the mainstream media were quick to condemn protesters. And now we are seeing protesters themselves issuing statements, hurrying to distance themselves from the events. Politicians will be rubbing their hands with glee as activists split themselves into two camps, with one morally-superior group demonising the other, and therefore weakening our collective outrage. Bristol’s local Extinction Rebellion group released a statement about Sunday’s events, saying: In light of last night’s events, XR Bristol emphasises its absolute commitment to non-violence.”

The Canary report on XR’s lofty statement of non-violence “This basic tenet is one of our core principles, and represents the values of our wide range of supporters, from grandparents to schoolchildren, to doctors, scientists, builders, shop workers, and teachers. Within their statement they included an image of a past XR action, showing a row of activists dressed in costume facing the police. ‘Check your privilege; The Canary’s Kerry-Anne Mendoza wrote a response to those who were condemning Sunday’s riot. She said: For many communities targeted by police violence, the white, middle class tendency to treat police as their mates is honestly galling. Those of us who have faced harassment and violence at the hands of police know it’s an institutional issue. We know we shouldn’t trust police accounts automatically. And honestly, given the revelations of past decades, neither should everyone else.”

The Canary note “It is surely those with white, middle-class privilege who are most outraged by a few burnt-out police vehicles and a couple of smashed windows. If you’re reading this and feeling anger at these words, check whether you have that privilege. If you do, it’s unlikely that you’ve been very harassed by the police in your day-to-day life. Yes, I am aware that you may well have been arrested at an XR protest, and you may have possibly posted on social media that you did yoga in your police cell. But if you don’t have white, middle class privilege, you will know what it’s like to live with daily police violence towards you. You know what it’s like to be racially profiled. You may well have been taken into custody, and if you have, it’s unlikely that you’ve felt safe enough to practice yoga. Someone you love may even have been murdered by the police.”

If that is your backstory the Canary say “You will likely be asking yourself, ‘what’s a couple of burnt-out cop cars in comparison to someone you love dying? Or if you’re a woman, you might have been tricked into a relationship with an undercover police officer, or raped by a police officer. You might even have a mother, a sister or a daughter who has been murdered by a police man.” They clearly assert “No, the police aren’t here to help you to ‘peacefully protest.’ XR Bristol continued their statement by saying: An organised protest can have safeguards in place, but Bristol police were warning last week of £10,000 fines for anyone who took an organisational role. The rally yesterday belonged to no organisation. When XR plans an action we organise stewards and marshalls, including stewards trained in de-escalation, plus a reasonable degree of police liaison. The escalation of yesterday’s peaceful protest demonstrates why it is essential that organised peaceful protest remains legal” They sound a bit ‘preachy!’

The Canary report “Through XR Bristol emphasising their commitment to non-violence and to ‘organised peaceful protest’, they are assuming that their method of organising with stewards is the only successful way to bring about change. But this statement reeks of privilege. For a start, a vast number of people in the UK don’t feel safe enough around the police to ‘liaise’ with them. And while XR Bristol might think this the best tactic, it is a foolish one. Because if you politely ‘liaise’ with the police, they will gather evidence on you and your fellow-protesters to use against you. They are not your friends, despite their often-friendly chatter. Their job is to protect the state, gather intelligence and to defend the status quo. Even if you do want to ‘peacefully’ protest, there’s no guarantee that the police will let you.” Carry a brief legally valid written statement that says “I am not legally required to prvide my name or any information to the police; thank you for your acceptance of my legal rights!” Some of the Police tactics of crushing restraint carry a serious risk of death: it is only a matter of time before a protester is killed!

The Canary say “Take this person who was beaten up at the Sarah Everard rally in London. He told The Canary: I am a strong believer of peaceful protesting, and I was just in the demo with some friends from work, when four officers grabbed me from the side, without explanation they put me to the floor. Whilst they were trying to handcuff me I was moving my arms because of the pain and then suddenly 10 more officers were on top of me. There was [an] officer sitting on my back, two officers on my shoulders, and the rest just using unreasonable force on me. They banged my head to the floor, scratched my hands, and the handcuffs were so tight that my wrists were bruised and knees. Or take Sunday’s Bristol protest. The Canary’s Sophia Purdy-Moore said: ‘We were literally sitting on the floor shouting ‘this is a peaceful protest’ while police hit protesters round the head with batons. At one point it looked like their horses were going to charge into the crowd. What response did they expect?’”

We cannot afford to be intimidated by threats of huge fines or aggressive Police tactics as “We must continue to resist the Police Bill.” The Canary remind us that “The government knows by now that its hope of quietly slipping through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill has failed dismally. In fact, their continuous violence towards protesters is just drawing more and more attention to it. If you’re sitting at home in a comfort that others can only dream of, please don’t condemn those who are fighting for our last slivers of freedom. Because banner-waving might not be enough to win this one.” Although I respect this argument and have not been among those criticizing the conduct of others; I do believe that a non-violent pathway is the most productive. This is primarily because the Tory authorities and their violent enforcers have absolute control over the media and that disgusting Tory mouthpiece the BBC. The slightest flicker of non-passive resistance will become the focus of attention for days on end.

When the aggression is all very clearly one-sided and Police attacks are entirely unprovoked there is nothing for them to highlight and fill the airwaves and tabloids with. My tactic would be to gather a core of individuals who are prepared to function as a protective front line and equip them with crash helmets, face guards and padded protective suits to resist baton blows. You could even issue a press release announcing that this has become necessary due to the threat of unprovoked police violence. Helmets could be fitted with bodycams for continuous hands-free filming without relying on a mobile phone which is easily wrenched from your hand in a scuffle and dashed on the ground. Organising stewards and marshalls, including those trained in de-escalation is a sensible idea and this doesn’t have to involve liaising with the Police, as this will become more and more difficult in future.

If protesters carry only flowers the Police excuse for resorting to violence completely evaporates. Breaking News: several Police officers were taken to hospital after being seriously injured when pelted by protesters with an avalanche of projectile daffodils! Your Honour, it was necessary for six officers to pin the petite female defendant to the ground after she threatened us with a sun flower! We do not have the climate for barefoot and half-naked Ghandi style, but he proved that non-violence can be powerful. It will take intense discipline to resist Police provocation, but it is the best way to disarm this Tory Government’s violent enforcers especially if everything is caught on camera. We should never have allowed this dangerous Fascist regime to corrupt our Electoral process and warp our BBC prior to the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. It was their takeover of the state broadcaster and dominance in the Media that duped so many into believing the Tory lies about ‘borrowed votes:’ this truly unfathomable result must still be Investigated. DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

I was about to post my reflection on the current situation when I was caught off guard a few days ago by the sudden shut down of this blog. It signified a grave development as Craig Murray’s predicament had worsened with the serious charge of contempt being supported by the Judge. He will need our moral and financial support in the weeks ahead, so I hope, like me, you will make a payment to his fighting fund. It was a very depressing sign to know that one of our finest ‘truth tellers’ was being persecuted to gag his writing and to reinforce the Scottish Government lies in the hounding of Alex Salmond. So much right now is grotesquely unfair as the innocent are punished and the guilty well rewarded for their treachery. However, these few days of blog blackout have had a profound effect on me, as if a huge weight was lifted from my shoulders when I was unable to write. I became less distressed and anxious I even slept well at night. I think I must scale back for my own mental health, contributing my thought less frequently here.

Ever since taking Lariam for the Amazon portion of a lengthy millennial holiday jaunt around South America I have experienced really colourful, vivid, graphic and convoluted dreams. Lariam is a dangerous choice of prophylactic antimalarial medication that should be strenuously avoided due to its side affects, but that is another story; it changed my dream pattern for life! Sometimes my dreams are like beacon metaphors instructing my life choices and the temporary shut down of this blog presented my with a clear choice: to resume regular writing as before when it went live again or to scale back? That night I dreamt I was sailing offshore on a small yacht. As the wind picked up, I instructed a crew member how to help me secure a reef in the mainsail, reducing our sail area in preparation for a gale. Good preparation avoids panic and disasters; I think we all need to prepare for the horrendous storm that lies ahead. The better prepared we are, the better equipped we are to deal with the onslaught of authoritarian Fascism to come.

Then, almost half awake, I imagined I was sailing towards a harbour entry at night in the pitch black, searching for an unlit buoy. I used to have excellent night vision that astounded fellow crew members when I was at sea, but I relied on a few tricks that bear a relevant message as we flounder in the darkness of impending dictatorship doom. Hyper-vigilance can be counter productive as it raises stress and overwhelms the senses that can pick up subtle indicators of great importance. I had two special tricks for spotting unlit buoys on the darkest nights and both demanded that I relax my eyes to a point where they were barely open, but receptive to vital visual ques. One method I called ‘track’ because it required me to look for a barely perceptible dark spot blocking the shore lights as it tracked in relation to our progress. The second again aided me on dark, moonless nights. I called it ‘the blink’ as it was literally a tiny blink of light visible for just a couple of seconds when star light caught the disturbed sea water as it riped past a buoy.

Once spotted I couldn’t ‘unsee’ the object in the water and it was confirmed with other information from the chart. Both techniques require relaxation to be effective as hyper-vigilant nervousness will drown out such subtle, barely perceptible, pieces of crucial information. Watch, wait and prepare, respond when necessary: we must continue with robust resistance, but my constant battery of words is not informing the discussion and I must scale back for my own mental health, contributing when there is something of real importance to say. As I awoke that morning I thought of porridge oats. I am not a Scottish person craving my national staple; in fact I find porridge rather bland and last remember consuming oatmeal in the freezing Southern Ocean on a Whitbread race boat. So why was I thinking of porridge oats to the point where I recalled their long forgotten taste? For me those porridge oats represent a feeling of reassuring comfort a powerful desire for genuine security that I seriously crave right now in this time of national turmoil.

So much has happened in the last few days following the ominous sign of Craig being temporary forced to close his blog thereby conceding to the wicked Scottish Government conspiracy targeting Salmond. But like that unlit buoy that once spotted cannot be unseen, his exposure of the untold truth behind their case to frame Alex was out there for all to see and so many avid readers of this blog read and absorbed that information. The Courts have closed the barn door after the horse has bolted, but the histrionic reaction in trying to gag a truth teller only served to shine a giant spot light on the truth. “Me thinks thou doth protest too much” as the saying goes; such a massive effort to target one of the very few people reporting on the reality of the evidence, rather than the salacious propaganda fed to the tabloid press, is concrete verification of the importance of what they tried so hard to expunge. Still there was a heavy price to pay for such success and unless this verdict is overturned on appeal Craig might well go to jail.

I appreciated Craig’s recent post with an excellent explanation of the D’Hondt voting system, a recommended read if, like me, you are not already familiar with this voting option. The Mainstream Media aren’t keen to point out the idiosyncrasies of this system as it fully supports Alex Salmond’s canny decision to set up his new Alba Party: to win a ‘Supermajority’ for Scottish Independence. The impact of his decision will have the British Government very worried and we can expect them to spew a steady stream of bile to destroy the come-back kid, but the opportunity will not be missed by savvy Scots who see a chance to seize their independence. I wish him well with his project that will be gaining a full head of steam in the coming days. I am not sure that I understand why all of the AFI candidates including Murray stood down to avoid competing with Alba: surely it would have been better to join forces under one banner? Will Craig Murray and the others consider standing as Alba candidates? But Craig has other things to worry about…

The violent resistance to the Policing Bill is increasing by the day and the single most important thing is that the truth of what is taking place emerges to counteract the deliberate Government disinformation campaign. Yesterday the army in Myanmar warned determined protesters that they could be shot in the head or in the back if they continued to defy the military coup. Did issuing a warning give them permission to shoot people stone cold dead? No, of course it did not allow them to deny guilt for the innocent civilians massacred in the continuing repression inflicted on the citizens of Myanmar. It has taken tremendous courage for their people to face the might of the military in full realization of the consequences. Avon and Somerset Police with riot control backup attacked without any warning in their unlawful violent break up of the peaceful protest in Bristol. The people of Bristol now realize the huge risk they must accept to continue protesting. We must demand an immediate end to the violence: this is not Myanmar!

Perhaps I am trying to apply too much logic to what is obviously a hyped-up piece of pro-Tory propaganda, but something does not make sense here. How come a group of unarmed seated protesters managed to inflict ‘serious injuries’ on police carrying shields and armed with batons who allegedly suffered ‘broken bones.’ Let’s get real here, if a solid line of fully kitted-up riot police, with sturdy helmets and visors, cannot manage to protect themselves with large riot shields while wailing on unarmed protesters with their batons swinging then they are a pitiful and pathetic disgrace to the police force! But to save them any further shame, I will reveal what I read on the very last line of the BBC News Article entitled “Bristol protests: Police action at Kill the Bill demo,” where they stated: “Following medical assessments on two officers taken to hospital at the weekend, neither suffered broken bones.” This free-for all of unprovoked Police brutality was ‘sexed-up’ for the media by Persecutor Patel to demonize peaceful protesters!

What has been totally ignored here is the reality that significant injuries were inflicted on protesters who had no means to defend themselves. There are accounts of protesters being beaten over the head with batons capable of causing severe concussion, loss of consciousness or in extreme cases death. There are also reports of protesters being slammed on the ground by police and having several officers pile in on top of them. It’s entirely unnecessary for an unarmed suspect to be forced down onto the ground in an excessively humiliating and punitive way that implies their criminality. Plus the current police tactic now gaining popularity, where as many as six officers kneel on the victim in an effort to secure restraint where there is no sign of resistance, risks crushing that person to death. But, ignoring the implications of the Derek Chavuin trial in the US, instead of ruling out this dangerously heavy-handed tactic the British police seem determined to precipitate their own ‘I can’t breath’ incident. It is only a matter of time before a peaceful protester is killed by police.

Journalist Martin Booth, who attended the protest for the Bristol 24/7 website, said he believed police had been “quite heavy-handed” against protesters. “Some of them were sitting down as the police waded in and it was quite shocking to see,” he said. “These protesters may have been there against the law but they were not spoiling for any fight, from my perspective.” But, the force said, like on Sunday, it only took action after dark when people ignored instructions to leave. John Apter said: “My colleagues are battered and bruised, in some cases physically. We’ve got a number of officers who were injured on Sunday evening, some very seriously.” Avon and Somerset Police arrested nine people that day and according to Chief Supt. Carolyn Belafonte claimed to be conducting a ‘substancial’ investigation into assaults on 40 police officers in potentially ‘one of the largest’ in the force’s history! But, she stated “Following medical assessments on two officers taken to hospital at the weekend, neither suffered broken bones.”

This wild exaggeration of injuries suffered by police during protest that turn ugly is nothing new; it is their bog-standard response. Unfortunately the extensive disinformation regarding the alleged “serious police injuries” is far more visible and pervasive on the Internet and in the Media than the truth that there were no officers with broken bones. Although I respect those defending protester actions and haven’t criticized the conduct of others, I remain convinced that a non-violent pathway is the most productive. As stated before “This is primarily because the Tory authorities and their violent enforcers have absolute control over the media and that disgusting Tory mouthpiece the BBC. The slightest flicker of non-passive resistance will become the focus of attention for days on end.” We must call out the sheer hypocrisy of this Tory Government ranting about the suppression of peaceful protests in Myanmar while inflicting violent retaliation against protesters here in the UK, with deadly force capable of killing unarmed citizens just as George Floyd was “lynched by knee” in the US!

Last week there was a truly historic moment of note in the inglorious career of our corrupt PM, Boris Johnson, as he totally stunned us all by ‘telling the truth;’ admitting that the success of our vaccine program was down to capitalism and greed! Yes, greed, sheer unadulterated greed, perpetrated by the wealthy Tory elite in their unrelenting exploitation of the working poor! Not as if we didn’t all know that already, but such candor from the PM took us, well… by shock. Could the Tory Sovereign Dictator and his rabid cabal of corrupt sycophants make further deeply embarrassing gaffs that dismantle the carefully scripted narrative being used to dupe the British people? Who is most likely to fall into a sinkhole of potent unconscious honesty about the underlying motivations behind the ruthless campaign of tyranny this Government is still responsible for? Self-awareness zero Matt Hancock is a strong contender and Robert Jenrick too, but my money is on Priti ‘Ice Pick’ Patel for the next almighty clanger in the Tory train-wreck ahead.

With Priti Patel as Home Secretary overseeing the implementation of the most draconian piece of legislation ever to be rammed through our Parliament we are in a very bad place. Priti Patel claimed to be ‘upset’ by what was incorrectly described as ‘clashes between police and protesters’ when they grossly over-reacted to the peaceful vigil for Sarah Everad. “Few Brits can imagine how anything might ‘upset’ ‘Ice Pick’ Patel as she certainly doesn’t show one once of empathy for those on whom she inflicts untold suffering,” without doubt one of the most cruel and heartless Tory MPs. As stated in a previous post “Priti Patel was so ‘seriously annoyed by the Extinction Rebellion protests that she broke a fingernail rapping on her desk in a fit of peak; she wants protesters thrown in jail for inflicting such serious distress! This is the Tory ‘mountain out of molehill’ rant to strip away our civil rights and lock up all outspoken activists as criminals in their repressive authoritarian distopian nightmare scenario of ‘new normal’.”

In reality this is one of three very dangerous pieces of legislation set to strip away our rights and reinforce illegal actions by our military abroad. The policing Bill joins the Spycops Bill and the Overseas Operations Bill, in addition to an ominous tilt in our military intentions with the threat of a nuclear response to a Cyber or Chemical attack, both so easily constructed as False Flag events for fake provocation. In 1930’s Germany the citizens failed to recognize the slide towards totalitarianism, but right now there is absolutely no excuse for us to cling to the facade of ‘British exceptionalism’ to pretend there is no danger here. We cannot ignore the march towards an authoritarian police state that those in Hungary, Turkey and elsewhere sadly failed to prevent. Their citizens are warning us of the fast approaching point of no return; once the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship is fully consolidated it will remain in power for decades! That’s the terrifying experience globally: it takes untold slaughter and decades of resistance to remove them.

In the Labour Heartland Article Entitled “Protest laws move UK towards paramilitary policing, says former police chief,” there is a clear warning of where the UK is heading under this Fascist Tory regime. “A former police chief has warned that new protest laws move Britain dangerously towards ‘paramilitary policing’ and that UK ministers are ‘flexing their muscles via their police forces’ like repressive regimes around the world. The warning from Michael Barton, the former chief constable of Durham comes as policing braces itself for a report expected within the next 48 hours after Metropolitan police officers were accused of heavy-handed tactics at a vigil on Clapham Common for Sarah Everard. Under pressure, the home secretary has ordered a report expected to arrive early this week from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary. The key question it will answer will be whether the Met’s actions were proportionate or not.”

Labour Heartland report that “As the new protest laws pass through parliament, Barton and another former senior policing leader, Sir Peter Fahy, told the Guardian they held deep concerns about the dangers the new laws posed for civil liberties already reeling from a year of emergency Covid laws. Mick Barton, was head of crime operations for policing nationally, and led the Durham constabulary until 2019, which inspectors rated as one of the best performing forces in Britain. He says: “I’m not in favour of even more restrictive measures. Surely after an historically unprecedented year-long curfew, in peacetime, the government could show some common sense and gratitude for such incredible forbearance to allow civil liberties to once again flourish. Or are they happy to be linked to the repressive regimes currently flexing their muscles via their police forces? ‘Fortunately, in the UK we are not a paramilitary-style police force. But these powers dangerously edge in that direction.” Let us not remain complacent just asking “are we there yet?”

Labour Heartland say “Fahy, the former chief constable of Greater Manchester police and former vice-chair of the police chiefs’ body, said the proposed protest laws were a mistake and posed a danger for policing. He said lessons from the past suggested danger, citing the quashing this week of 1970s convictions of trade union activists including the actor Ricky Tomlinson as a warning from history. ‘It is short-term and politically driven,’ he said. ‘It is a reaction to what happened with Extinction Rebellion and Black Lives Matter [protests], in the same way Ricky Tomlinson was a reaction to the industrial strife of the 1970s. Policing was drawn into a particular stance and pose. ‘It reminds me of the miners’ strike when policing was mobilised for a political reason. It took policing a long time to recover. Policing should be very careful not to be drawn into the situation of being arbiters of which protests can go ahead, and become stuck in the middle. The policing of protest can cause long-term damage’.”

But how can we best fight-back without resorting to violence and why pursue this pacifist tactic in clashes with police? As stated in my last post “When the aggression is all very clearly one-sided and Police attacks are entirely unprovoked there is nothing for them to highlight and fill the airwaves and tabloids with. My tactic would be to gather a core of individuals who are prepared to function as a protective front line; equip them with crash helmets, face guards and padded protective suits to resist baton blows. You could even issue a press release announcing that this has become necessary due to the threat of unprovoked police violence. Helmets could be fitted with bodycams for continuous hands-free filming without relying on a mobile phones which are easily wrenched from your hand in a scuffle and dashed on the ground. Organizing stewards and Marshall’s, including those trained in de-escalation? This is a sensible idea, but it doesn’t have to involve liaising with the Police, as this will become more and more difficult in future.”

I suggested that “If protesters carry only flowers the Police excuse for resorting to violence completely evaporates. Breaking News: several Police officers were taken to hospital after being seriously injured when pelted by protesters with an avalanche of projectile daffodils! Your Honour, it was necessary for six officers to pin the petite female defendant to the ground after she threatened us with a sun flower!” The other day it was my birthday. Over the week during which Craig Murray’s Blog was in blackout I resorted to ‘retail therapy’ buying a few items online to try to convince myself that more than a year on from the Tories seizing power, and surviving to reach one year older, it was a ‘happy’ day for me. I was comforted to learn that Craig’s late mother had used the exact same fatalist expression my own late mother often repeated: “It is all part of life’s rich pageant.” I have never had a great deal of material wealth, but I’ve lived a very rich and colourful life, full of interesting and intense experiences good and bad.

Murray potentially faces a grueling experience behind bars, punished for his activism and determination to expose the truth. He too has had an extremely eventful life with many positive accomplishments to be proud of, not least of which the interventions that now have him threatened with jail. I am confident he has the stoicism to accept his fate, but we must loudly and robustly criticize the authorities for this perversion of justice. I hope the new Party, Alba led by Alex Salmond, will compel the SNP to get their house in order as I can well imagine why the Scots are so eager to break away from the UK. A bizarre purchase of mine was a Union Jack apron, but before you carp-on about supporting that foul Tory flag fetish, I must tell you I intend to daub it in red stains to represent the blood on the ‘Butcher’s Apron.’ What if a significant group of protesters were all pictured wearing a blood soaked Union Jack ‘Butcher’s Apron?’ This is the kind of attention-grabbing visual that the press cannot help falling for: it gets printed and can go viral.

Exposing the vile reality this iconic emblem of our past British empire steals the toxic symbolism that the Tories are trying to force on the rebelling public with their jingoistic nationalist fake patriotism. We have to be more savvy in our protests a target satisfying the press search for a ‘Hook!’ True, “We do not have the climate for barefoot and half-naked Gandhi style, but he proved that non-violence can be powerful. It will take intense discipline to resist Police provocation, but it is by far the best way to disarm this Tory Government’s violent enforcers, especially if everything is caught on camera.” As stated so many times before “We should never have allowed this dangerous Fascist regime to corrupt our Electoral process and warp our BBC prior to the Covert 2019 Rigged Election. It was their takeover of the state broadcaster and dominance in the Media that duped so many into believing the Tory lies about ‘borrowed votes:’ this truly unfathomable result must still be Investigated.” I will be writing here a lot less often in future, but: I HAVE NOT MOVED ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Two shocking white-wash reports, one to normalize police brutality the other to deny racism, emerge as Derek Chauvin goes to trial. Bad boys, bad boys whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? A catchy tune for a popular TV presentation of US Law enforcement in action, a show where they begin with the incongruous statement: “All suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a Court of Law!” Well you could have fooled me… That poor bastard, predominantly a man of colour, squirming, prostate face down on the ground in the dirt, ‘munching the asphalt’ so to speak, sure didn’t look like much attention was being paid to any ‘presumption of innocence.’ How did US policing reach such an extreme stage of manhandling suspects, but more importantly right now, when and why did the UK choose to emulate this excessive use of force? This aggressive, vindictive, public humiliation is an overt assertion of criminality and one that’s frequently grossly disproportionate to any violation that might have been suspected.

I am eager to hear Derek Chauvin’s Lawyer construct some type of justification for his cliants cruel actions in the public murder of George Floyd. Why is this so important? Because only by fully understanding exactly what police training is instilling in the force and what procedures have become normalized and acceptable, do we have this unique opportunity to challenge this increasingly violent authoritarian culture and set new rules. If a suspect has a weapon, becomes violent or they are an imminent flight risk the order to “get on the ground” might be justified, but if they truly are innocent until proven guilty there is no legitimate reason to exact punishment of any kind let alone torture leading to an extrajudiciary execution in full view of impressionable minors. Those young people will be deeply scarred by witnessing this grusome public ‘lynching by knee’ as it has been called. A Firefighter testified how she was refused access to offer medical assistance; she will be forever traumatized by her inability to do her job of preserving life.

They say to “Assume makes an ass out of you and me,” but perhaps there are certain things that conscientious Police Officers should ‘assume’ when approaching a suspect. If they have been called to the scene to apprehend someone under the influence of narcotics it’s crucial to ‘assume’ that opioid drugs might depress their breathing. What other reasonable ‘assumptions’ should a cautious arresting Officer make knowing a suspect has a history of opioid addiction? Cardiovascular and pulmonary diseases are common among chronic opiate abusers who may concurrently suffer from other comorbidities and exhibit a myriad of complications including hypotension. But, in light of these significant risks Chauvin decided it was appropriate to heighten Floyd’s stress level by slamming him onto the ground and actively compromising his breathing! Why did a drug disorientated unarmed man, presenting no threat, who may or may not have used a counterfeit $20 bill, but was already securely handcuffed need to go down on the ground?
This grotesque indignity is resorted to by out-of-control Police Officers, often with racist motivations, to intentionally humiliate, bait, aggravate and escalate a situation that could have been dealt with calmly and rationally. After allegedly witnessing consumption of some pills and having been called to the scene regarding suspected drug intoxication there was even greater necessity to act with extreme caution. Chauvin’s Lawyer asked the jury to examine the facts rationally because his client had done exactly as he was trained to do. Well if that was truly the case there’s a lot catastrophically wrong with Police training! Despite the strong suspicion Floyd was under the influence of narcotics that could compromise his breathing and put a strain on a drug damaged cardiovascular system Chauvin clambered on top of his back and neck to constrict his breathing. What did he think was going to happen under such extreme circumstances? Why did he threaten the qualified medic, concerned enough to offer to check Floyd’s vital signs?

Imagine if this were the defence Lawyer in a different murder/manslaughter case: “Your Honour the man was unable to swim and desperatly reaching for my cliants hand as he feared drowning. Naturally the defendant reached out and shoved his head under the water to expedite his demise, but he denies any wrongdoing or responsibility for the man’s death!” Chauvin’s Lawyer is trying to claim that it was George Floyd’s opioid addiction that killed him, his poor health, a heart condition probably as a result of his drug use, but kneeling on his neck just exacerbated his potentially fatally compromised breathing to hasten his death, while blocking his access to medical attention. Even the youngest of the children who witnessed this horrific event was smart enough to realize that George Floyd was being killed right there in front of them all. The defence want us to believe it was acceptable for a supposedly trained veteran Police Officer to be incapable of recognizing that his knee was choking the life out of a man yelling “I can’t breath.”

Chauvin refusal to allow a trained Medic to assess and treat George Floyde is unforgivable as he must have been fully aware that he was commiting murder. But, like so many other rogue Officers before him, he was no doubt emboldened by the fact that such excessive use of force rarely results in any internal discipline let alone a criminal conviction. The total lack of humanity expressed by Chauvin during that excrutiating nine minutes of torture demonstrates his contempt for the law, the public he was employed to protect, but most of all the racial hatred he must have harboured to commit such an appauling crime. One of the observers noted how he appeared to be enjoying the pain he was inflicting on a black man; drunk on the euphoria of the power his badge conferred on him. As the prosecution Lawyer so eloquently reminded the jury, after going to great lengths to outline the fine ideals of every Police Force and the sworn commitment of Officer’s in a duty to protect and serve the public, ‘Derek Chauvin betrayed his badge.’

Chauvin was a repeat offender with 23 complaints against him during his 19 years on the force. Right after his arrival on the scene he was pictured with both of his hands around Floyd’s neck after he was dragged back out of the police car. Chauvin’s bodycam fell to the ground with no explanation of why? I would say that the US authorities need to do so much more than find Chauvin culpable and guilty of murder because ‘this time he went too far.’ This is an opportunity for the public to demand that the obvious precursors to such inhumane treatment are entirely removed from common practice with use of force a real last resort in extreme emergencies both in the US and here in the UK. Instead of expanding the justification for excessive force we need to strip back authorization of such powers so that in future Police Officers never come close to taking another life because they ‘just went too far!’

The defence want to exonerate Chauvin by claiming that an opioid overdose was the real cause of death, but their argument does not justify exacerbating the well recognized complication of: depressed breathing. The combative, doped-up, criminal defence is all too familiar, but in reality the escalating opioid crisis in the US is fueled by the overprescription of medications for chronic pain, a common problem that Floyd’s girlfriend admitted they both suffered from. With the growing number of Police call-outs to overdose situations, forces across the US are training their Officers to use Narcan (Naloxone) to reverse and prevent a deadly consequence: depressed breathing. Paramedics noted that Floyd’s pupils were dilated, not opioid pinpoints. Although the training teaches Officers to recognize the signs of an overdose, it’s a safe drug, causing no harm to a person not on drugs. Also Narcan doesn’t need to be injected and as one of the meds that can be applied down an endotracheal tube there is now an easy to use nasal spray applicator.

Video footage appears to show that George Floyd had already been handcuffed and was in the police vehicle when Derek Chauvin arrived on the scene. It is unclear why he was dragged back out of the car, but the violence escalated when he was forced onto the ground. This unnecessary move was bound to induce panic initiating a vicious cycle, as such distress signaled an expectation of violence that was soon fulfilled! Anyone on the ground will instinctively resist the extreme discomfort of being held down which then escalates to the point where several Officers are pinning the suspect down with increasing pressure on the torso and possibly their neck. Floyd would either have needed to be allowed to stand up to get back into the police car or have the life crushed out of him to the point where he was carried from the scene; Chauvin consciously chose the latter thinking he would get away with it.

I am not entirely ignorant of the potential for agitated individuals to become seriously unmanageable, exhibit seemingly super-human strength or become violent and a threat to others. There were occasions when I worked in the ED at Jackson Memorial in Miami when the Police brought in a patient under the ‘Baker Act’ who required restraint. It was crazy enough in that overwhelmed public facility without patients kicking-off, but we were all encouraged to take a course in non-violent crisis intervention. This two day course instilled a few important principles regarding de-escalation and how to stay safe while treating the mentally disturbed with humanity. Drugs offer an escape to the desperate who are often struggling in a dire situation without hope, but they are no less deserving of our care and sympathy than the terrified young man I witnessed experienced his first psychotic break as a schizophrenic in my ED. Code named a ‘vitimen H moment,’ when a patient at Jackson became extremely agitated or dangerously combative we administered Haldol.

If a suspect’s hands are already handcuffed behind their back they cannot use a weapon or gain complete freedom by running, so logically there is no reason for them to be wallowing face down ‘chewing the concrete;’ this is sadistic, punitive and is bound to induce a desperate reaction. It appears that increasingly the Police don’t need to justify why such degradation might have been necessary due to serious combative behavior or flight risk neither of which was true in Floyd’s case. There are powerful indications that this extreme practice has just become routine practice even here in the UK. We religiously follow all US bad practice as the vigil arrests demonstrated. With the warped report on the Clapham vigil Priti Patel is seeking to normalize dangerous aggressive practice like bringing an unarmed person to the ground and piling in on top. In addition the Police cannot be allowed to revel in the adrenaline rush of uncontrolled violence as appeared to occur when Officers in Bristol used their shields as offencive weapons!

This trial is taking place in the US, but we need to pay close attention here, because all of the dangerous precursors to extrajudicial executions by rogue Police Officers are being rationalized, right here, right now, in the UK. The exact same potential for extreme escalation exists within our law enforcement where Home Secretary Priti ‘Ice Pick’ Patel is eager to expand the Police powers to resort to excessive force on a more regular basis: against peaceful protesters to protect Corporate and Tory Government interests. Such was the case when an unarmed female morner at the Sarah Everard Vigil was wrestled to the ground by Police Officers in Clapham, but an ‘Internal Review’ of the event has completely exonerated the police of any wrongdoing. This was an inevitable conclusion that we must robustly challenge, as it effectively, very publically, normalized excessive use of force by the police. This was the hardest case for this authoritarian Tory Cabal to justify as it was a vigil for a woman allegedly killed by a Police Officer.

It is not difficult for regular ‘white folk’ to dismiss the harsh reality of ongoing racial profiling as urban myth and try to find less toxic explanations for the experiences of even our most trusted friends. When I was putting together my international all female team to compete in the Whitbread Round the World Race, a creative young Puerto Rican entrepreneur offered to help me with computer graphic design for our Team Pro-Maxi logo. He was a highly motivated, extremely industrious individual who channeled all his funds and boundless energy into his business enterprise; despite losing touch I really hope he is doing well. He paid little attention to the condition of his rather beat up car, it was functional and got him around; he really didn’t need to impress anybody. However as a darkly complected Hispanic with a strong accent he got pulled over by Police a lot. At first I questioned his driving and the run down state of his car, but in reality, I was just incapable of comprehending the very real racial prejudice of ‘driving while black.’

Throughout my life and despite intense pressure, due to my dyslexia, I resisted being forced to learn to drive a car; in the US this singles you out as downright weird. One evening while I was living in Fort Lauderdale it was dark as I walked home carrying two full bags of groceries; I took a shortcut beneath a building leading into an alleyway. As I emerged from the alleyway I intentionally ignored what seemed like heckling coming from a passing van. This turned out to be a police van and to them I looked like a really easy target for harassment as a ‘bag lady’! Two Police Officers bounded out of the van brandishing truncheons in an aggressive show of force. Brandishing my broccoli and milk wasn’t going to cut it; they wanted to take me down to the station. I felt totally helpless and terrorized, less than two blocks from where I lived with John awaiting my return. What ended this scarry standoff? I pulled out my business card with a business address in that same block they were claiming to protect from a ‘dangerois bag lady,’

All of a sudden I was no longer an easy target for harassment; I was among the privileged white elite, an eccentric business owner risking walking home alone at night. I was so incredibly angry when I got home all I could think of for days was leaving the country. At last I finally understood those who felt targeted and were so angry at the Police. Those two Officers tapped their batons in their palms in a threatening manner to indicate that they wouldn’t hesitate to cosh me if I dared to move without their permission. But, they did not lay a hand on me, I wasn’t handcuffed, I wasn’t forced to get down on the ground or suck the curb; how lucky I was for all those white privileges! It was in that one brief moment when I came close to feeling the deep humiliation and anger that targeted minorities must feel on a daily basis. Looking back on this traumatizing event I realize it was a vitally important wake-up call and I am damn glad I was targeted! Screw the Tories bogus review, racism is not over in this country, we must robustly fight it head on!

Racist PM Boris Johnson decided that the multiple reports on UK racial disparities he has simply dismissed to gather dust, with their important recommendations studiously ignored by his racist Tory Government, signaled the need for yet another report. In a callous response to the Black Lives Matter campaign the dictate regarding the remit required all the data to be very carefully cherry-picked in order to deliberately slosh several large buckets of whitewash over those past reports and bin them along with their tedious recommendations. The report’s warped findings were an urgent necessity to support the Tory double-speak of our racist PM in his La La Land pronouncements to the BBC, the press and in the House of Commons. Johnson’s hand-picked out-of-touch elitist team of hard-core diversity denialists, placed in key ministerial roles, are dedicated to a ruthless agenda of flushing future opportunities for their ethnic minority brethren down the sewer. The Sewell Report will certainly expedite their passage towards the sluice gates!

One of the most deeply offencive passages in the report attempts to rebrand the atrocity of slavery as if it was some peverse fast-track to a better life under the British Empire boot. According to this slick report it would be unwise to teach our children the truth about this particularly brutal episode in the history of our nation. Such honesty wouldn’t be ‘on message’ at a time when the Tories are so determined to instil homage to the Union Jack untainted by the horrific reality of the blood soaked ‘Butcher’s Apron!’ The ongoing remembrance of the Jewish Holocaust is observed without question, not because anyone wants to revel in the carnage that occurred under the Nazis, but because we must continue to demand “Never Again.” If the British history curriculum remains in persistent denial of the subjugation, exploitation and ravages of empire perpetuated throughout the globe there is no necessity to correct that injustice and Tories will build support for their abandonment of Foreign Aid obligations in favour of continual greed.

In the London Economic Article entitled “Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities chair accused of ‘putting positive spin on slavery and empire” Joe Mellor highlights reactions to Tony Sewell’s Report. He notes that in his foreword Sewell “argued that ‘neither the banning of white authors or token expressions of black achievement will help to broaden young minds’. The chairman of a Government-backed review of racial disparities in Britain has been accused of putting a ‘positive spin on slavery and empire’ when explaining its recommendation on teaching history in schools. The Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities report published on Wednesday proposes a Making Of Modern Britain teaching resource to ‘tell the multiple, nuanced stories of the contributions made by different groups that have made this country the one it is today’.”

Mellor says that “In commission chairman Tony Sewell’s foreword to the report, he said the recommendation was the body’s response to ‘negative calls for ‘decolonising’ the curriculum’. He wrote that the resource should look at the influence of the UK during its empire period and how ‘Britishness influenced the Commonwealth’ and how local communities influenced ‘modern Britain’. He added: ‘There is a new story about the Caribbean experience which speaks to the slave period not only being about profit and suffering but how culturally African people transformed themselves into a remodelled African/Britain.’ Highlighting the passage on Twitter, Labour’s shadow women and equalities secretary Marsha de Cordova said it was ‘one of the worst bits’ of the report. She tweeted: ‘Putting a positive spin on slavery and empire. Published on a Government website in 2021. Is this for real?” Sewell’s swill can now be used to sanction racist Boris Johnson’s propaganda lies spewed during PMQs and Press Briefings.

Mellor notes that “He added: ‘We have argued against bringing down statues, instead we want all children to reclaim their British heritage. We want to create a teaching resource that looks at the influence of the UK, particularly during the empire period. We want to see how Britishness influenced the Commonwealth and local communities, and how the Commonwealth and local communities influenced what we now know as modern Britain. One great example would be a dictionary or lexicon of well-known British words which are Indian in origin.” I guess what he means is that the ‘dirty dhoby’ of our disgraceful racist colonial past of obscene exploitation doesn’t need cleansing in the bright truthful sunlight of reflective awareness honesty. I find this nationalist flag waving fetish a truly sickening development of ‘divide and rule’ in the UK, with heavy jingoistic overtones in readiness for another unnecessary foreign intervention of distraction. Fxxk the Butcher’s Apron; I will remain a committed ‘Peaceful Patriot of the Planet!

The unchallenged result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election gifted us far-right Tory bigots in Government, desperately defending the brutal excesses of their privileged elite ancestors who gained their wealth by plundering former colonies subjugated during imperial expansion. They want to deny the past to hang on to their current privilege, power and wealth while engineering a new wave of intense exploitation of the working poor here as they advance their greed under a banner of ‘Global Britain’ overseas. The debt they owe reversed to maintain a massive disparity of access to funds and resources, where former colonies rich in minerals remain indebted to the British crown in perpetuity. Our determination to control the patents of desperately needed vaccines will fuel even greater poverty and inequality as the profiteers continue their limitless plunder of the most vulnerable. Greatly reduced Foreign Aid is a pittance in comparison to our relentless plundering and the damage inflicted with our bombs: ill-gotten gains not yet repaid!

In the London Economic Article entitled “Race report caps off a ‘big week for marking your own homework” Jack Peat remarks that “In the Netherlands there is a marketing expression. ‘We, the people at Toilet Duck, recommend Toilet Duck’. A landmark report commissioned by Downing Street has today dismissed that institutional racism might exist in the UK concluding that the country should, instead, be seen as an exemplar of racial equality. The report, which was presided over by two people who denied the existence of institutional racism from the outset, found that there is some evidence of overt racism, but denied it was structural. Commission chairman Tony Sewell had previously claimed that evidence of the existence of institutional racism was ‘flimsy’ while Munira Mirza, who heads up the Number 10 policy unit, has also hit out at a ‘culture of grievance’ among anti-racism campaigners in the past.” But ominously, on the day of the Sewell Report’s full release the only BAME Special Advisor at Number 10 just quit.

Peat notes that “The findings come the day after the Met Police was commended for how it handled a vigil for Sarah Everard in Clapham Common. A report by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) found that officers at the event did their best to peacefully disperse the crowd, remained calm and professional when subjected to abuse, and did not act inappropriately or in a heavy-handed manner. That is despite footage appearing to show police grabbing and dragging several women away as the peacefully mourned Everard’s death.” Remaining in denial over the excessive use of force will result in a fatality. “Posting on social media, Jamie Johnson said this has been a ‘big week for marking your own homework’, citing Number 10 defences over the Jennifer Arcuri allegations as another case in point. He referenced a marketing slogan from the Netherlands which read ‘Wij van Wc-eend adviseren Wc-eend’, or ‘We, the people at Toilet Duck, recommend Toilet Duck’.”

Peat reports that “The slogan remains used today as a general saying to dispute the independence of ‘expert’ statements when they align with self-interest.” However, the recent attention on the Arcuri affair is hardly the most egregious abuse of power or rabid Tory self-interest. Beyond the copious bucketloads of whitewash chucked at the public in the form of bogus reports to insist ‘black is the new white’ the single most grotesque Tory Government corruption after the endless squandering of public funds was the stolen vote that shoe-horned this regime into power. The UK started down a slippery slope towards zero accountability political totalitarianism after the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, when we decided that scrutiny was unnecessary as an unfathomable result could go unchallenged. However, it is not too late to demand a full Investigation especially in light of the huge volume of continuing corruption. In a functioning democracy Tories would be in jail not trusted with high office: end the Tory Sovereign dictatorship now! I HAVE NOT MOVED ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

It has become almost impossible for me to feel encouraged by anything these days, but quite by chance I stumbled across a really down to earth Video by Richard Murphy entitled “Why are the Tories so worried?” I hope that this corrupt cabal are paranoid and absolutely shit scared; after repeatedly cringing each time they succeed in ramming through one of their ruthless policies I was eager to hear Murphy’s opinion on why he thought they might be in the desperate throws of decline. He elaborates on the evidence of their current behavior, highlighting four main Tory failures: Brexit; Covid; Corruption and the break up of the UK. While not in his initial list the renowned economist doesn’t fail to add his favorite topic, the decline and inevitable demise of Neolibral economic policy making. All of Richard Murphy’s video presentations are well worth watching, but while this one inspired a glimmer of hope for the future, he did not provide a likely timescale or a clear roadmap out of this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship quagmire.

With regard to Brexit Murphy points out how badly it has gone wrong coming from the enlightened perspective of an economist. The catastrophic failure of Brexit is being deliberately hidden from the public, buried under an all-consuming preoccupation with Covid, but as the data is incrementally revealed the news looks disastrous. Massive red tape and restrictive encumbrances have stagnated our exports while imports remained relatively steady thus creating a trade imbalance that Tory fantasy trade deals are unable to fix. We are not even experiencing the worst of the restrictions yet because the Government has postponed implementing certain measures that they know will exacerbate the problem. Despite breaking the terms of the recently signed agreement by maintaining relaxed rules regarding goods bound for Northern Ireland, the province has been the worst impacted by trade shortages that were anticipated well in advance of signing the contentious Tory protocol. This has now sparked violent protest riots in Belfast.

Murphy is not fooled by the recent popularity of the much trumpeted, Tory manipulated, vaccine rollout to combat Covid, qiuping rather sarcastically that we have managed to reduce the death toll down to the equivalent of just one ‘jumbo jet load’ a week! We have surpassed the 150,000 fatality mark and nothing can make such a gargantuan deadly failure of public policy look acceptable. He points to SAGE warnings that we could see a fourth wave of infections and another shut down this summer just as the public are itching to get away on holiday. The copious BBC ‘handyfloss’ and Media hype emphasizing ‘bums on beaches,’ in warm and sunny places overseas, intentionally detract from the reality of the dire Tory decision making. Unvaccinated young people eagerly await increased freedom that Boris Johnson has sadistic and miserly control over with a very heavy emphasis on returning to working environments that are not necessarily safe and the need to spend money that most ordinary people simply do not possess.

Boris Johnson made enemies on the continent with his one-way nationalistic hording of the vaccines in an effort to increase his popularity with the patriotic brigade back in the UK. Not only could Tory plans all go horribly wrong, but some of their selfishness and risk taking is already starting to backfire. Finally the Oxford team have admitted to a rare, but deadly possible side effect of the jab they prioritized for British use at the expense of reneging on EU contracts, probably done at the politically motivated behest of the PM. The reckless blunders in containment measures and woefully lax border control helped incubate a Kent Variant which now appears to be one of our most successful exports to the EU! In addition, and unique to the UK, the Tory punt on extended the gap between first and second jabs might offer the perfect environment for incubating another, more transmissible or highly resistant, mutant strain of Covid that could easily scupper Tory triumphalism with an even more virulent onslaught taking yet more lives.

Tories have never commanded a crisis without seizing a massive exploitation opportunity for personal enrichment, so the Covid 19 Pandemic was just too great of a bonanza to pass up. The zenith of obscene Tory corruption has been too blatant to be kept under wraps or even glossed over discreetly by the compliant right-wing Media; it is right out there, in your face as they insist that their Tory Government is above and beyond the law. However although the Tories committed to hobling Judicial Review and gaining control over Judicial appointments in their manifesto, they have not accomplished that swiftly enough to avoid a number of crippling judgements coming down the pike. From bogus PPE procurement contracts to white elephant ‘Nightngale Hospitals’ they could never manage to staff and an exorbitantly expensive Track and Trace system that would have been more aptly named ‘Hinder and Hide’ under the misdirection of serial loser Dido ‘Tally ho’ Harding, corruption is the hallmark of this Tory cabal.

To my great amusement Murphy shared a telling piece of trivia regarding the derogatory origination of the ‘Tory’ name: from the Irish language, meaning, ‘Outlaw, Robber, Brigand.’ I felt inextricably compelled to verify what Murphey had revealed. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary: “Tory (n.) 1566, ‘an outlaw,’ specifically ‘one of a class of Irish robbers noted for outrages and savage cruelty,’ from Irish toruighe ‘plunderer,’ originally ‘pursuer, searcher,’ from Old Irish toirighim ‘I pursue,’ from toir ‘pursuit,’ from Celtic *to-wo-ret- ‘a running up to,’ from PIE root *ret- ‘to run, roll’.” In the prophetic words of one of the cruelest Tory Prime Ministers: “Nothing has changed!” Exhibiting ever more brazen corruption, supported by copious amounts of ludicrously incredulous media spun propaganda and their stranglehold on power, the greedy Tory elite are still rampaciously plundering all of the country’s resources and callously impoverishing the British people while bragging about their fake Tory policies for ‘levelling up!’

There is a finite limit to the profitability of plundering from the critically downtrodden working poor, so Murphy is right to point out that the Neoliberal model is unsustainable, but is he right to surmise that it’s nearing the end-game? Evidently one very serious financial collapse was not enough to clean up ‘Russian Roulette’ style banking practices and hedge fund gambling. There is no planet B, but despite fast approaching a tipping point in the climate crisis, like moths drawn to light that kills them, sadly the human race seems incapable of deselecting socioeconomic collapse or total planet-wide annihilation! Murphy reminds us that corruption has signalled the demise of Tory Governments in the past; we desperately need that day of reckoning and certainly within a functioning democracy this should be the logical conclusion. The question is, have the current Tory Sovereign Dictatorship managed to use their corruptly obtained power to inoculate themselves from scrutiny, accountability and the legal consequences of their relentless pillaging?

Murphy’s fourth point regarding Tory failures focuses on the imminent break up of the UK starting with Scotish independence, a return of ‘the Troubles’ in Ireland that could lead to a United Ireland and now even Wales considering the benefits of breaking away from Tory dominated Westminster. The Tories like to downplay the resource wealth of Scotland that they have been in such a strong position to exploit for so long, but the Scots are not stupid when it comes to money. The Tories need Scotland to remain within the union to keep their nuclear submarines stationed on the Clide; independent Scotland wants rid of them and nowhere else is eager to provide safe haven south of the border. But as much as the Tories still determinedly cling to an increasingly fragile Union their toxic policies are seriously alienating the rebellious populations in all parts of the UK and it’s only a matter of time before the UK is torn apart just like the great former empire. This will not reflect at all well on the Prime Minister who oversees this fragmentation.

For those of you unfamiliar with Richard Murphy he is a chartered accountant who has recently put out a number of excellent explanatory video presentations focusing on Modern Monetary Policy in an effort to educate the public regarding the failed Tory austerity agenda and the advantages of our fiet currency. His bio says “After training with what is now KPMG he established his a firm of accountants in London, of which he was subsequently senior partner, in parallel with a career as an entrepreneur and company director which lasted until his early 40s. He then moved to a career in campaigning and academia. He co-founded the Tax Justice Network in 2003, the Green New Deal in 2008, the Fair Tax Mark in 2013 and the Corporate Accountability Network in 2019. From 2015 to 2020 he was Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City University of London and is now Visiting Professor of Accounting at Sheffield University Management School. His best known book is ‘The Joy of Tax’.”

The British are a freedom loving people waking up to the reality that this rabid Tory Sovereign Dictatorship are determined to strip away not just workers rights, but a multitude of basic human rights in the most serious onslaught on our freedoms for over a century. The classic complacent ‘winging POM’ puts up with hardship and just grumbles about the impact of totally unacceptable injustice. That has led to the acceptance of the ruthless ravages of austerity only to now discover that this cruelty was a completely unnecessary political choice made by the Tory Party for personal enrichment. This fact was fully exposed before the Covert 2019 Rigged Election which is why I am in no doubt that the result was rigged to provide a Tory ‘landslide victory,’ a result which must still be Investigated. It is simply inconceivable that large numbers of desperately poor, relentlessly exploited former Labour voters wouldn’t have realized that voting for the Tories would mean condemning their children to starve as is happening right now.

In the Canary Article entitled “The DWP policy that is nothing short of eugenics,” they say “We can now properly analyse the effect of a four-year-old Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) policy. It’s caused poverty to increase.” The say “The policy may also have caused an increase in abortions. But exclusive research by The Canary has also found birth rates among the poorest women have dramatically fallen; potentially also due to the policy. Yet so far, the DWP maintains that there isn’t a problem. The two-child limit is a DWP policy. The then Tory government brought it in on 6 April 2017. It meant the DWP would only pay Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit for two children in a family; any more than this the DWP would not count in benefits calculations. The policy has been controversial. A court ruled in June 2017 that the policy was ‘discriminatory’ against single mothers with children under two. Then, in April 2018, another court said the cap was unlawful. This was in relation to young carers.”

The Canary highlight another controversial outrage citing how “The so-called ‘rape clause‘, where women have to prove they’ve been raped to get an exception to the two-child limit, also sparked outrage. Now, four years on, the long-term effects of the two-child limit are clear. The Canary reported in 2018 that the number of households likely to be hit in the future by the cap would explode. In April 2018, just under 71,000 households were subject to the limit. Now, as of April 2020, the number has rocketed to 250,000.” The article includes a number of graphs that depict the impact of increasingly punitive Tory policy. “In April 2018, around 200,000 children were affected. Now, this figure is over 900,000. Meanwhile, the DWP has effectively cut over £5bn from people’s social security with the policy and the real-world impact is very concerning.” The Tories remain steadfast in their cruelty and immune to external criticism even as the UN steps in to feed starving children in London, England, one of the richest countries on earth!

The Canary report on the “Increasing poverty” says that “According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) data on poverty, there has been a four percentage point increase in the number of households below average income where three or more children live; up four percentage points from 43% to 47%. That’s nearly a 10% increase. As the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) wrote: estimates suggest that by the end of this Parliament, more than 600,000 families are likely to be subject to the limit, pushing an estimated 1.3 million children into, or deeper into, poverty. The CPAG also looked at abortions. It found that there was a “sharp” overall increase after 2017: In 2016 in England and Wales there were just over 185,000 abortions. By 2019, this had increased by 11.74% to just over 207,000. But crucially the CPAG said that abortion rates for women who already had two or more children increased ‘most rapidly’ after 2017.”

“The Canary analysed the birth rates for women by socioeconomic status; that is for the richest and poorest women” remarking that “Poor people: not having kids.” They say that their “Research found that birth rates fell generally. This was comparing 2017 and 2019 figures. The biggest falls have been among the poorest households.” In the table included in the article, “1.1 is the richest, 8 is the poorest. We cannot directly say that the falls are due to the two-child limit. But given the effect of the policy on abortion and poverty rates, this additional impact is likely. Moreover, the reduction in birth rates in the poorest groups is sudden. As The Canary previously reported, between 2013 and 2016 birth rates in groups 5-8 fell overall by 0.9%. Now, between 2017 and 2019 this accelerated to a 12.4% fall.”

But, the Canary point out that “This drop also correlated with the 11.74% increase in abortions. Because the poorest women are having abortions at over twice the rate of the richest. There is no comparative yearly data for abortion rates per socioeconomic status prior to the two-child limit being introduced. But abortion rates had been rising across all groups between 2013-2018. It appears from the data that between 2018 and 2019, increases in abortion rates were most marked in the poorest groups (a 0.9 point increase in the poorest versus a 0.4 point increase in the richest).” Haughty elitist MP Jacob Reese Mogg is a practicing Catholic who has sired six children and is adamantly apposed to abortion, but aparently his beliefs and commitment to his faith isn’t strong enough to exclude the poor from the being forced to make a brutal pragmatic choice to abort their babies.

“The Canary asked the DWP for comment. A spokesperson told us: Universal Credit has provided a vital safety net for six million people during the coronavirus pandemic and is supporting people back into work through our comprehensive Plan for Jobs. In 2020, 85% of all households had two or fewer children, which is reflected in our policy. There are appropriate exemptions in place. But the DWP’s own research shows that these exemptions are tiny. In April 2018, the number of households with three or more kids the DWP gave an exemption from the limit to was just over 2,800. By April 2020, the number was around 12,500; an average of 4.75% of households hit by the policy across the UK. This is actually a reduction on 2018, where the percentage was around 8% of the total households having an exemption.”

The Canary asks was this “Intentional eugenics? The two-child limit has been perhaps the Tories’ most noxious policy. It’s hard not to look at it and think that the DWP and government intentionally designed it to stop poor people having children. Because as the CPAG noted: If these findings are related to the two-child policy, it is horrifying. China’s one-child policy was driven by burgeoning birth rates. We have sub-replacement fertility. There is no other country in history that has adapted social security policy to increase child poverty to reduce fertility or encourage abortion. It is a completely outrageous assault on liberty. The word for this would be eugenics.” The Canary insist that “Successive Tory governments and the DWP have meted it out, without recourse.”

In the Left Foot Forward Article entitled “Four years of the Tories’ two-child limit: Here’s what it’s done,” Lucy Skoulding points out that “If the Tory policy was scrapped now 200,000 children would immediately be lifted out of poverty. The Tory party’s ‘obscene’ two-child limit and ‘rape clause’ has now been estimated to negatively impact 350,000 families and 1.25 million children in the four years since it was imposed. Since April 2017, parents having a third or subsequent child are not eligible for support, which is up to £2,830 per child per year, through child tax credit and universal credit if they need it. The policy also includes the caveat that, to claim for a third or subsequent child conceived through rape, women must make a declaration to the DWP, meaning they have to relive their previous trauma. A report by the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) published today has also found that the impact of the two-child limit on families has been compounded by other Tory cuts to social security, including benefit freezes and the benefit cap.”

Skoulding reports that “Before Covid-19, £36 billion a year had been cut from social security since 2010 because of Tory policies. The CPAG report estimates a further 15,000 families, amounting to approximately 50,000 children, have been affected by the policy because of the pandemic than would have otherwise ‘in spite of extensive measures taken to protect people from the economic impact of the pandemic’. In one case study shared, a whole family fell apart during the pandemic. The family ‘could easily afford’ to pay for all their children before the husband became ill and was unable to work. The youngest child needs childcare which the family cannot afford, meaning one parent has to work from home. ‘We are living in poverty,’ the case study reads, ‘with no way out before he starts school, or my husband recovers enough to restart work or look after the children’.”

Skoulding reveals that “In another one, a parent says the policy makes it feel as if their third child doesn’t matter. ‘I made the decision to have a third child while my husband and myself were in work. My husband then left the day before the lockdown and I had to claim universal credit. It feels as though my third child doesn’t matter and his food, housing and basic living standards don’t matter.’ In addition to the negative impact this policy is having on so many children generally, the report has also found evidence to show it disproportionately affects women and certain religious and black and minority ethnic communities. Estimates, for example, show that that 29 percent of families impacted by the two-child limit are single parent families headed by women, while 1 percent are single parent families headed by men.”

Skoulding notes that “Perhaps the most powerful finding of the whole report is that if the two-child limit were removed today, 200,000 children would immediately be lifted out of poverty and 600,000 children would be living in less deep poverty than they are now. At a cost of £1 billion, this makes scraping the two-child limit the most cost-effective way for the government to reduce child poverty. The SNP has staunchly condemned both the two-child limit and rape clause and is calling for the policy to be scrapped. SNP Shadow Chancellor Alison Thewliss MP said: ‘The Tory government has pushed millions of people into poverty with its barbaric cuts to social security. It’s obscene that they remain so wedded to the two-child cap and rape clause, despite the overwhelming evidence of the damage it is doing to our society. It must be scrapped. ‘Covid has exposed the deep inequality that exists under the broken Westminster system’.”

Skoulding says “While the SNP government is putting money into people’s pockets with progressive policies like the Scottish Child Payment, the Tories are taking billions away with cuts to family budgets. ‘The DWP’s own statistics show the damaging impact their policies are having, with an unmistakable increase in poverty levels amongst families with three children or more, and 47 percent of children in these families now living in poverty. Not only does this harmful Tory policy make it increasingly difficult for families to get by in these challenging times, there is evidence that it forces women into an impossible choice between serious financial difficulty or terminating a pregnancy’.” Wall to wall coverage on the BBC as British subjects are expected to mourn the passing of HRH after an amazing 99 year life of opulent luxury. Condolences to the royals, but who is there to mourn the thousands of destitute homeless who die on the streets of our wealthy nation after surviving an average 47 years ignored in abject misery?

The deafeningly silent scream of the millions who care about ending poverty and grotesque injustice was stifled with their invisible protests throughout the UK. “Nothing to see here…” as only the riots in Belfast made the BBC news cycle of the last week, but this belligerent and deliberate blackout of reality in response to ‘Kill the Bill’ protests cannot deter us from further action. If our actions were a welcome, accepted component of our vibrant democracy then they would be reported and responded to by the PM and his Ministers. Perhaps, despite outward bravado, they really are running scared. Richard Murphy says “You’d think that a government with a big majority and high on the polls would have little to worry about, and yet the Tories are showing signs of being very worried. How long is it before failings on Brexit and Covid 19 catch up with them, corruption is rumbled and Scotland declares it has had enough, leaving them as the party that killed the country? Their behavior suggests that they think the answer is ‘not long’.” DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Kim Sanders-Fisher]

Fat Cat Boris Johnson is being ‘urged’ to sanction splashing out the totally obscene sum of £190 million on a luxury yacht with the vessel to be named in honour of the late Duke of Edinburgh. The public aren’t even shocked that another huge dollop of dough might be allocated to the super wealthy elite while the UN steps in to feed starving children in the capital of one of the richest countries on earth. If that doesn’t scream inequality, exploitation and corruption what will it take for our citizens to revolt? Amid the nationwide compulsory tributes thrust upon the long-suffering British public via the trusted Tory propaganda mouthpiece at the BBC, who drenched us in wall-to-wall coverage, now there is talk of commissioning a new Royal Yacht! While the public can certainly empathize with the Queen over the loss of her lifelong companion, husband and Prince Consort there are so many throughout the country whose desperate plight is ignored; where is our noble Queen’s compassion for those less fortunate masses she rules?

As I have taken pains to point out here before, while HRH lived a very full life of opulent luxury, the average homeless person does not survive beyond half his age. The Tory Government didn’t quible for an instant before approving the staggering amount offered to the Queen to compensate for her financial losses from her extensive property portfolio due to Covid 19. While the Sovereign Grant Fund perpetually ratchits up, despite an economic downturn, the misery of the Queen’s subjects spirals remorselessly down towards destitution. You do not need to be rabidly anti-monarchy to scream in frustration that our privileged head of state really should at last set a clear example to the wealthy 1% that they could do so much more. The greatest speech Queen Elizabeth II will never deliver has the potential to mark the most important legacy in tribute to her dead husband HRH Prince Philip. So what could our revered Queen say and do to begin to redress the massive disparity between the privileged elite and the poor in the UK?

She might begin by thanking the public for all their kind displays of sympathy providing so much comfort to her in her time of grief. She might then claim: “My husband and I have always maintained a sincere concern over the welfare of the British people…” But this hails from a lady whose opulence is so great that it provides an aloof detachment from the growing reality of rampant poverty among the majority of her ‘subjects.’ Is she blissfully unaware that the UN has stepped in to feed the starving children in London? Is she oblivious to the UN rapateaur’s repeated recriminations over Tory human rights violations in their punitive abandonment of the disabled resulting in thousands of unnecessary deaths? Why isn’t she deeply ashamed of the destitute homeless, as bundles of human detritus litter our streets, disgarded to die in abject misery at half the age of her beloved Prince Consort? Only a person totally devoid of any semblance of conscience could honestly express pride in ‘ruling’ over such a festering cesspit of corrupt depravity.

The BBC and Mainstream Media’s PR machinery maintain the propaganda of this benevolent old lady to whom we all owe fealty and reverence. While she is constrained by historical obligation to refrain from political commentary she is not incapable of controlling her own finances and using generosity to set a compassionate example that other titans of wealth would feel compelled to emulate. The Queen could use the distressing occasion of Prince Philip’s death to establish a significantly generous fund in honour of her late husband and encourage the wealthy elite to chip in the spare millions in cash they have been raking in during the Pandemic, to eradicate poverty, destitution and homelessness throughout the realm. In such compelling circumstances, under an appeal directly from the Queen, those messages of condolence could be suitably monetized as prominent personalities outbid each other and the privileged 1% were publicly embarrassed into parting with their cash to help compensate for decades of elitist exploitation.

The Queen is not short of money and this might offer her a unique opportunity to explain just why the crown accepted a massive compensatory payout, authorized by this crooked Tory Government, to top-up the Sovereign Wealth Fund at a time of crisis when impoverished British children were on the brink of starvation. She could explain that regrettably it took time to organize exactly how the fund would be managed and allocated, a task her now deceased husband would have helped her plan before his death. That really would be a stunning legacy, genuinely appreciated by her long-suffering ‘subjects,’ and it could be administered independently from Tory Government corruption and punitive means testing of recipients. Even overseas contributors including serial plunderers like Amazon’s Jeff Bazos might use this as a PR opportunity to provide philanthropic cover for their decades of exploitation. The Queen’s immense global influence could pry generous contributions from the Davos crowd as they jostled to publicly show respect.

This is a unique opportunity for the Queen to establish her own legacy by initiating a global shift in priorities thus offering obscenely wealthy people a chance to absolve themselves of the crime of their rapacious greed. The British hate to admit that they see their own much revered monarch as the ultimate greedy parasite supported by the self-serving Parliamentary decisions of the horde of greedy parasites in Government who have extorted every last ounce of blood, sweat and tears from the population of this country for centuries. Their model of rampant inequality is unsustainable as there’s a finite amount of money you can manage to squeeze out of those on the brink of destitution, but Boris and his Tory cabal want the public to stump up for a new royal yacht! The Queen herself is nearing the end of her long life, does she really hope to see all of her massive reserves of hoarded wealth distributed among her obscenely wealthy heirs or will she be persuaded to make a historic commitment towards eradicating inequality before she dies?

We should not forget the recent tragic failure of our monarchy to use the power that the British Queen uniquely still retains, to step in and rescue the country by demanding the resignation of her Prime Minister at a point where he Prorogued, Parliament, broke the law and forced us into a rigged election in which he should have been prohibited from participating. The Queen could have used her immense sway with the citizens of this country to set an important example of conduct that cannot be tolerated in a democracy and the Tory Party of ‘God, Queen and Country would be obliged to obey without question. While I am not a supporter of the Monarchy this course of action was within the Queen’s constitutional power under exceptional circumstances; Boris Johnson crossed the line to create that crisis. Despite probably realizing that the consequences of her inaction would be seriously harmful to our democracy and unnecessarily traumatic for her subjects she prioritized the interests of her own wealth threatened by equality under socialism.

The death of the Duke of Edinburgh has been seized upon by Tories as a chance to promote their mantra of ‘God, Queen and Country’, as they desperately apply the pumps to salvage the sinking ship of isolationist patriotism. The monarchy cannot possibly endure much longer in its current form, a potent symbol of the inherited wealth of undeserved privilege juxtaposed to the grotesque extremes of poverty in the UK. If this were the gross inequality displayed by a foreign despot we would be clamoring for justice for an oppressed people; do the British people not deserve the justice of equality? The Brits are cajoled into reverance, clinging to the nostalga of the notorious victories of empire we were taught about in school that are now start to sour as we learn the truth of brutal subjugation, slavery and exploitation under the ‘Butcher’s Apron’. You cannot eat a Union Jack! Now only the barrier of troubled Ireland remains to prevent the untethered remnant of ‘little England’ from drifting out to its rightful place of isolation mid Atlantic.

Homage to royalty, patriotism and the nationalist fervor are a desperate attempt to foster pride in our ruthless expansionist past that only the easily manipulated myopic sector of our increasingly multicultural society still cling to. It is heavily dependent on a culture of ‘divide and rule’ othering where all too many ordinary people are being swept into the net of targeted enemies of society. The Black Lives Matter protests were filled with white protesters who have come to realize the slippery slope we are being forced down by this rogue Government; now people are even prepared to protest in support of the Gypsies and Travelers the Tories thought of a safe bet easy target for their hateful ideology. Has the haunting message of a haunting poem that begins “First they came for…” resonated in the collective consciousness of the British public as a prophetic warning of the extreme and dire consequences of the road our nation is traveling down towards the far-right fascist goal of this Tory Sovereign Dictatorship.

Confident optimism is now reliant upon the expansive fake promises of a Government with a long and sordid track record of great abandoned pledges and a strong history of implementing austerity, but in the words of our former PM Theresa May “Nothing has changed!” Optimistic aspiration, striving to create a better life through hard graft is a whole world away from the current reality for most people in the UK who are caught in a desperate struggle for basic survival on a daily basis. There is a unique opportunity for this Tory Government to transform and drastically alleviate the mental health crisis, eradicate poverty and homelessness in this country by first and foremost, leaving office! An impressive consensus of cooperation and community cohesion is developing due to the unnecessary hardship and burdens inflicted upon vast swaths of the population impacted by this Tory Government’s criminally negligent exploitation of the Covid using the crisis as a tool to whitewash over the catastrophic mistakes of their hard Brexit.

The Covid Pandemic has made ordinary working people realize how easily the demonized ‘them’ can become ‘us!’ A huge number of people who honestly believed that they had reliable, steady employment, have now been forced to join the ranks of the despised unemployed. Previously they were heavily encouraged to believe that only the ‘losers’ and the ‘work shy’ brought such dire shame upon themselves and needed to rely on that precarious and punitive Social Safety net they were so eager to strip away. They paid into the system with their taxes and only had the number of children they knew they could afford to raise. Only now are they finally coming to understand why the cruel Tory ‘two child policy’ is grotesquely unfair punishment that’s not deserved by anyone’s innocent offspring as we can all fall on hard times. The Tories so called ‘strivers,’ even former entrepreneurs and small business owners are entering food banks for the first time, worried about basic survival and the devastating impact of destitution on their family.

This is the demographic who traditionally support capitalism, free enterprise, the security of empowered law enforcement, a strong overseas presence from our UK military, the importance of defence spending and retaining Trident, but at what cost? The current obscene level of Tory Government corruption has warped their perspective on ‘free enterprise’ as ‘crony capitalism’ has supported rampant profiteering during a time of crisis that has hit them hard. Our influence overseas is rapidly dwindling fast with the error of Brexit, untrustworthy adherence to signed treaties and the rule of international law, plus reversal of the Tory manifesto pledge on Foreign Aid. At a time when the Tories should be prioritizing the real threat to our precious NHS though underfunding, pay cuts, misguided outsourcing and privatization they are instead they boast of 48 new fantasy Hospitals they cannot staff and focus on saber-rattling against an unspecified foe to increase our nuclear arsenal and expanding justifications for deploying deadly weapons!

While those who haven’t in the past had to worry about job security are now being plunged into poverty this Tory Government has exhibited the classic behavior of despotic regimes, spending eye-watering sums of money on superfluous fluff that create a false impression of power and control with the trappings of opulence. First there was an unnecessary nationalistic paint job on a military plane for the sole purpose of increasing our pathetically insecure PM’s overseas prestige with an ‘Airforce One’ look alike. The recent outlandish expenditure to create a Press Briefing Room similar to his US hero Donald Trump was another clear indicator of the growing despotic narcissism of our usurper PM. It is not aimed at providing greater transparency it’s a stage set for our ruling Dictator to spout an endless stream of Tory propaganda broadcast via their compliant mouthpiece the BBC. Will the public get stuck with the bill for the privileged designer choices of Boris Johnson’s mistress with the costly revamp of Number 10?

Those who were moved to join the Sarah Everade vigil, some of whom had perhaps avoided public gathering due to the strict Covid restrictions or just not felt compelled to join protests in the past are now finding their voice only to have their delusion of ‘free speech’ in our democracy shattered by police violence. They are witnessing first hand the unprovoked attacks of police no longer focused on law enforcement to protect the public, but mobilized as the Government’s tool of repression just as it is used in brutal Dictatorships overseas. But with the UK populace are well connected online, regularly filming the reality on the ground and sharing YouTube videos while the BBC refuse to broadcast the news, this deliberate Government suppression of the truth cannot persist in keeping people ignorant of the facts. A totalitarian regime is rapidly securing absolute power in the UK and the disgruntled masses will need to unite as one to fight back to remove them from office before it is too late as Dictators cling to power for decades.

No doubt the Tories would deeply lament the minimalist ceremony for the funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh due to their Covid restrictions, but the BBC were seriously committed to forcing the entire nation to a few more days of mourning for a man who has been virtually ignored during his 73 years of service to the Queen. Competing for our attention now is the exposure of layer upon layer of Tory Government sleaze and rampant corruption they were hoping to drown out with prolonged homage to the Prince Consort as royalty is such an easy sell. The ranks of those who were once economically secure, but are now struggling to cope has increased exponentially due to Covid. Those who ignored Tory overspending on things like a dysfunctional Track and Trace system under the direction of Tory chum serial loser Dido ‘Tallyho’ Harding, the Nightingale Hospitals that could not be staffed and the dodgy PPE that had to be dumped are now outraged to discover this is just the tip of the extensive Tory corruption iceberg.

Former Prime Minister David Cameron never intended to address the Liberal Democrat proposals for reforming lobbying so he designed those so-called ‘reforms’ in such a way as to leave plenty of scope for future abuse. The lobbying of Charities on behalf of the public interest was more strictly curtailed which didn’t go unnoticed or unchallenged at the time. David Cameron’s obsequious overtures to Rishi Sunak and Mat Hancock onl serve to demonstrate the shameless expectation of privilege that is not a right of public office. Robert Jenricks maneuvers to assist a friend in tax avoidance and the exposure of tit for tat Tory leverage to insure that fanding intended for deprived areas is instead allocated to bolster the political hold of undeserving Tory MPs in a devious type of gerrymandering for votes. Dominic Cumings was the recipient of Tory largese and the PMs philandering led to the forking out of public funds to his mistress. Despite the legal challenges being brought will the public purse ever recover all the squandered funds?

In another arena of extreme public concern the Canary Article entitled “The shocking numbers of insecure workers who died of coronavirus” they point out how according to TUC research “Insecure workers died of coronavirus (Covid-19) at twice the rate of people in other jobs. That’s the finding of new research into the pandemic. It shone a damning light not only into the government’s response but also the state of employment in the UK more broadly.” Highlighting the problem of insecure jobs they report on “The Trades Union Congress (TUC) has researched how the pandemic impacted insecure workers. It says these are people whose: contract does not guarantee regular hours or income (including zero-hours contracts, agency work and casual work) or are in low-paid self-employment (earning less than the government’s National Living Wage). In total, this is one in nine in of those in work.”

But as the TUC said, insecure work is not just people like app-based taxi drivers. It said that the following percentages of workers were in insecure jobs. 15.6% of people in ‘caring, leisure and other service roles;’ 18.4% of those in ‘elementary roles, such as security guards, taxi drivers and shop assistants and 17.2% of ‘process, plant and machine operatives’.” The label it “Working chaos UK” saying “A lot of what the TUC found about the pandemic and insecure work was unsurprising. For example: Between those the government ‘excluded‘ and people who didn’t get help for other reasons, some three million people missed out on any kind of coronavirus support. In April 2020, two million people were not getting the minimum wage. Of these, 1.3 million were on furlough. Statutory Sick Pay (SSP) was not fit for purpose; 1.8 million employees had no entitlement to it, 70% of these were women. A third of people on zero hours contracts could not get SSP versus 6% of all employees.”

The Canary report that “Care workers were particularly hard-hit. For example, the government put in place the Adult Social Care Infection Control Fund. It was worth over £1.1bn. The fund was for care companies. Part of it was to pay staff who had to stay off work due to coronavirus. But as the TUC wrote: a UNISON survey of care workers revealed the money did not get through to workers, with more than two fifths (44%) saying their employer is offering just statutory sick pay (SSP) of £95.85. Around one in 12 (8%) workers say they and colleagues were not paid at all if they needed to stay at home.” This Tory Government put in place support packages without any necessary strings attached allowing exploitative employers to siphon off the money while they abandoned the needs of their staff; no where was this more abhorrent and abusive than in exploitation of Carers.

“Overall, the TUC also said marginalised communities bore the brunt of this.” In a move the Canary describe as “Marginalising the marginalised” they say the TUC “Research found that the following percentages of people are in insecure work: 7.1% of women versus 6% of men; 16% of BAME workers versus 10% of white workers; 12.1% of BAME women versus 6.4% of white women and 5.5% of white men. Also, bosses are more likely to employ disabled people on zero hours contracts (3.8%) than non-disabled people (3.1%). But it’s the death toll of coronavirus on insecure workers which is particularly shocking.” The Canary article includes illuminating charts that demonstrate the impact of this on various employment sectors. This distressing reality is far more relevant than the triumphalist bragging over the vaccine that has helped rescue the PM from far greater social unrest.

The Canary highlight the “Shocking coronavirus death figures” saying “The TUC found that insecure workers were more likely to have died from coronavirus. It noted that the death rates were: 51 per 100,000 for men in insecure work. This is versus 24 in 100,000 in ‘less insecure’ work; 25 per 100,000 for women in insecure work. This is versus 13 in 100,000 in ‘less insecure’ work. In short, the coronavirus death rate for insecure workers was double the national average. The TUC noted that the more insecure the industry, the higher the coronavirus death rate was: The TUC wouldn’t commit to why the rates were higher in insecure work. But it did note that: many of these occupations include work outside the home and that many insecure workers lack decent sick pay. In other words, people in insecure industries had no choice but to go to work in the middle of a global pandemic. Despite the risks, they could not afford to protect themselves and their families fully from coronavirus.”

Change is needed the Canary insist “As the TUC summed up: The pandemic has exposed the lack of dignity that many insecure workers face. Society relies on these workers to carry out vital roles such as caring for sick people and delivering vital food and other services. In return, a significant number of these workers will have no job or income security. It says that three things need to change: Increasing and enhancing sick pay entitlement; New rights for workers to benefit from the protection that collective bargaining brings; A ban on zero-hours contracts. After such a devastating time for so many workers, you’d hope the government would listen. Whether it will or not remains to be seen.”

Real change will take more than repeated reruns displaying the pageantry of a royal funeral to paper over the cracks. The feeble Prime Minister imposter is hiding from the reality of imminent collapse of his despotic rule of tyranny. Boris Johnson’s leadership failures have never been more starkly obvious as he hides behind this nationalist branding, with copious trappings of Union Jacks, as the Union goes into meltdown in Scotland, Northern Ireland, now even Wales eyeing independence. He cannot permanently dodge the catastrophic failures of his shambolic Covid strategy and badly botched Brexit leading to riots in Ireland and destruction of our export market. The growing number of street protests cannot be quelled with increased police violence without the distinct possibility that peaceful protesters will be seriously injured or killed. The systemic Tory corruption is creating a vile stench of sleeze that his nauseating attention-seeking photo-ops cannot dispel: Ian Hislop expose the PM’s façade on “Have I got News for you.”

Boris Johnson is obsessed with creating a desirable image of himself as a rampant stallion conquering attractive blond bombshells due to his sexual prowess: this is a woefully feeble profile that screams massive insecurity. The pathetically contrived appearance of his permanently ruffled hair, as if to imply the robust lebido of a much younger man in a continual state of coitus interruptus, caught out during an indulgent perpetual sexual rampage: what a sick joke! In reality the PM displays all the vim and vigour of a sedated sloth as he cultivates the classic impression of an overindulgent lazy git who just fell out of bed after a night of excessively heavy drinking! The truth is that Boris is pudgy, pushing 60 and he’s far too narcissistic to consider diverting attention from his own instant gratification to ever devote even the briefest moment to the genuine desires of any female companion. The PM lacks the self-awareness to recognize the ridiculousness of this pathetic character he presents to the British public and to the world.

Just as he was at the start of the Covid Pandemic, Boris Johnson is guaranteed to be strategically ‘missing from action’ with his tousled mop in the sand ostrich style as per usual. Now this spineless wimp is ignoring his ultimate responsibility for the broiling riots in Belfast as he runs off to the comfort of scheduled photo-ops in Cornwall, but still he remains too cowardly to face down the ridicule of locals demonstrating their disdain for his febrile attempts to cling to power through authoritarian policing policies. Like his rejected hero Donald Trump, he will never be taken seriously as a respected statesman by overseas dignitaries; it is our turn in the UK to endure the folly of his continuing public embarrassment until he is removed from office. We are entirely capable of truncating this torment by calling him and his corrupt Government to account over the mounting scandals of perpetual plundering of public funds and by demanding a full Investigation into the incredulous result of the Covert 2019 Rigged Election: Get The Tories Out Now! DO NOT MOVE ON!

[Author]

Posts