Hard working or hard shirking?

There are proper concerns about the effect of being long-term unemployed. Soul-destroying, alienating, unhealthy and uncivilised, the cumulative effects in a region can be awful. Lack of self-esteem and initiative produces a deadening dispiriting aura. Travel through many semi-abandoned towns with high streets full of pound shops, charity shops, payday loan companies and masses of gambling joints and wonder - how has it come to this?

There are many varieties of long-term unemployment. Thanks to Thatcher laying waste to vast industrial regions in the 80’s, we have generational unemployment where several members of the same family have never worked. There are people in their 50’s deemed surplus to requirements and made redundant who find companies not interested in taking them on. Proud capable people caught by circumstance find themselves labelled as lazy layabouts and worthless. There are also the chronically idle who will work very hard to avoid anything resembling ‘work’. 

The people generically labelled shirkers by silver-spoonfed politicians, themselves members of the Etonocracy, remote and arrogant, find that they are once again used as whipping boys. Iain Duncan Smith (who ‘scrounges’ on his wife’s estate) was at it again yesterday. There is something terribly Victorian about IDS. He knows what is best for the lower orders. And by jingo he will do his damnedest to see that they are ‘dealt with.’ 

His latest wheeze is another triumph for ideology over reason. Across the country the long term unemployed are to report to their local job centre every day and stay there for 7 hours each day. This is weird. Doing what? “Improving their CV” --- oh, right, that will keep them occupied. Think about the implications for job centre staff and the potential for further problems. We treat criminals better. A community service sentence involves putting something back by doing unpaid work in the area. What is to stop the unemployed being given something practical to do for their money and self-esteem? In the past during hard times there were big civic projects created to provide gainful employment. 

No chance with this bunch, who are set on dividing and ruling with plans to turn the gullible onto the unfortunate. The Victorians used a treadmill to keep the destitute and unworthy ‘occupied’. They also cherished workhouses for the poor.  

Watch this space....

Meanwhile, the banking criminals who fiddled the Libor rate continue to get away with it. It would not have anything to do with the the involvement of a former Tory party treasurer would it?

The Incredible Shrinking Tory party

The attendance figures for the Conservative party conference tell a tale of how David Cameron lost his core membership and let the bankers in

“Naturally, it kicks off with a message from the PM. "Our conference is the perfect opportunity … for all delegates and participants to discuss the key issues of the day with a wide variety of politicians, charities, business leaders, international guests, and interest groups." This is the image the Tories want to push in their sales brochure for sponsors: that this week's get-together in Manchester is less about the clash of ideas, and more an exclusive networking event.

On it goes, touting "exciting opportunities" to highlight your firm's message. For a minimum of £20,000 plus VAT, you get to sponsor the VIP lounge (the Blue Room, natch) where "high-profile guests can relax, hold briefings". Illustrating the point is a photo of Iain Duncan Smith and Tory pollster Lord Ashcroft having a private moment by a tray of sundaes. Too expensive? Then £5,000-plus will get you access to an invite-only party, with the implicit promise of facetime with a minister. Another picture of Ashcroft, this time at dinner with George Osborne and Ken Clarke.

At the last general election, more than half of all Conservative funding came from the City, according to extensive research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. That's double the amount when Cameron won the leadership in 2005, and financiers made 25% of Tory donations. By financiers, I'm not referring to the high-street giants that you bank with. I mean Adrian Beecroft, Michael Farmer and Lord Stanley Fink: hedge fund speculators, private-equity barons and other members of what is sometimes called the shadow banking industry.

As investments go, it's paid a handsome dividend, because the Conservatives have fought fiercely for the interests of the City. Yesterday, George Osborne announced a plan to make life much tougher for those out of work for a long time, including a proposal to make them sign on at a jobcentre every day. Last week, the chancellor announced he would fight the EU in court for the right of bankers to be paid big bonuses. Life for the poorest in austerity Britain to get harder; life for the richest to be made easier: surely even the most tin-eared of politicians wouldn't get caught out like that, unless their war chest depended on it.

...the way that contracts to run academy schools and parts of the NHS keep going to Tory financiers. In 2011, the contract to run NHS Hinchingbrooke hospital in Cambridgeshire was awarded to Circle, a company part-owned by hedge funds run by three of Cameron's biggest donors: Paul Ruddock, Crispin Odey and Michael Platt.” The Guardian

Aditya Chakrabortty 30/9/13

Now when you hear the Tory party bang on - and on, and on, and on - about ‘hard working families’ think of it as them talking about the mafia. 

A commonly heard maxim is ‘you get what you pay for’ which is certainly true when applied to the banking fraternity. 

They have the Tory party on the payroll and, unlike the unions and Labour,  they do get what they paid for.

We don't.

NHS March

 Public =Good

Private=Could do better

The station at New Mills was closed this morning. It was a Sunday. The train was a longer one than usual at six carriages. It was not packed. More people got on at Hazel Grove and  it became busier. There was no sign of the guard/ticket operative. At Piccadilly terminus two lines formed. Those who had bought tickets at a station which had them for sale were checked and went swiftly on their way. The rest of us had to queue to buy tickets as two harassed workers did their best to cope. Aint private business brilliant? Not on this evidence.

The reason for the journey was the ‘Save the NHS’ demonstration in Manchester - held to co-incide with the Tory Party Conference. The designated gathering place was the usual organised chaos. The nearest coffee bar was struggling to cope with the numbers. Sticking strictly to their ‘barista is best’ approach they were being inundated with customers and potential customers all wanting a coffee before the protest. This private company had not got a clue. A touch of lateral thinking, a hint of foresight and voila! A big tea urn selling tea, a bog standard jug (large) of coffee, all at a £1 a pop-with milk and sugar available- result! Many more contented customers, happy staff and joy all round. It did not happen.

The march itself was a well-supported affair. It was sunny and windy which made banner-holding a challenge. Difficult to say how many attended but it did take a long time to file past. Many, many banners - some home made with pithy points on them e.g. ‘This government = 1% Eton, 99% Mess.’  

The privatisation of the NHS has begun and many people present were very angry about it. Nye Bevin was quoted at length, particularly, “The NHS will last as long as there are folk left with the faith to fight for it.” This was juxtaposed with Cameron’s whopper “No Top Down Reorganisation in the NHS.” How must Clegg feel when he (rightfully) copped so much flak for reneging on his tuition fees promise?

Bevin would have been sickened by NewLabour, who opened the door to privatisation; unsurprised by the Tories - a species he despised and not best pleased with the LibDems collusion with the nasty party.

There were many very angry today at the bedroom tax and others unhappy at the surveillance culture revealed by Snowden. Zero-hours contracts also rightly came in for some stick. The changes in legal aid were also challenged. Quite a collection. These were decent people prepared to spend their own time and money to stand up for their beliefs.

Compare and contrast with the slimeballs of our three main modern political parties who attach themselves to the wealthy and aspire to become corporate whores.Everything they do is with an eye for future enhancement. 

The Tory party, happy in their gilded balloon inside the GMEX security wall will slither on, unconcerned at the plight of the weak and vulnerable.... but anxious that UKIP’s loonies are enchanting their core support. They will enjoy the corporate hospitality and do their unrecorded deals. 

Such is life in 2013 Britain.

A View from Brazil

by Vanessa Barbara 26/9/13

“At the opening of the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Dilma Rousseff, the president of my country, Brazil, delivered a scolding speech in response to reports that the National Security Agency has monitored electronic communications of Brazilian citizens, members of government and private corporations. Like a displeased school principal, Ms. Rousseff seemed to speak directly to President Obama, who was waiting in the wings to deliver his own speech.

She called the surveillance program “a breach of international law” and “a situation of grave violation of human rights and of civil liberties; of invasion and capture of confidential information concerning corporate activities; and especially of disrespect to national sovereignty.” She seemed personally offended when she demanded “explanations, apologies and guarantees that such procedures will never be repeated.” Last week, she called off a planned visit to the United States, after she learned that the N.S.A. had gained access to her own e-mails, telephone calls and text messages.

Inside its own country, the N.S.A. needs a warrant to wiretap citizens. But not abroad. According to one document, Brazil is included in a group of key countries being closely monitored by the N.S.A. under the rubric “Friends, Enemies, or Problems?”

Like most Brazilians, I was annoyed to learn that the American government might have been gathering data from my computer and phone calls. But on the bright side, I am hoping that it has kept a backup of my files, since a few months ago I realized that I could no longer find an important video anywhere in my computer. (Mr. Obama, if you’re reading this, please send me the file “summer2012.wmv” as soon as you can.)

The United States has suggested that its interception of data also aims to protect other nations against terrorism. But Ms. Rousseff had an answer for that, too: “Brazil, Mr. President, knows how to protect itself.”

The country’s strategy on that matter does not limit itself to diplomatic grumpiness. Ms. Rousseff has also proposed establishing “a civilian multilateral framework for the governance and use of the Internet.” It would ensure “freedom of expression, security and respect for human rights” by protecting personal information online.

But for now, we citizens have our own plan. It has become something of a joke among my friends in Brazil to, whenever you write a personal e-mail, include a few polite lines addressed to the agents of the N.S.A., wishing them a good day or a Happy Thanksgiving. Sometimes I’ll add a few extra explanations and footnotes about the contents of the message, summarizing it and clarifying some of the Portuguese words that could be difficult to translate.

Other people have gone so far as to send nonsensical e-mails just to confuse N.S.A. agents. For example: first use some key words to attract their surveillance filters, like “chemical brothers,” “chocolate bombs” or “stop holding my heart hostage, my emotions are like a blasting of fundamentalist explosion” (one of my personal favorites, inspired by an online sentence-generator designed to confound the N.S.A.).

Then write indiscriminately to friends and acquaintances about serious stuff like: how Doc Brown stole plutonium from Libyan nationalists, or why poor Godzilla had to attack the City of New York. It is recommended to act as crazy as possible, in order to raise questions about your secret intentions.”

From an article published in The New York Times

So, Ladies and Gentlemen of GCHQ/NSA, hope you enjoyed the article.

Russia v Greenpeace

Former ambassador Craig Murray has this to say on his blog:  “Russia is casting around for legal measures it can use against Greenpeace.  To any reasonable person the accusation of piracy is ludicrous.  Russia has come to it because there is no other charge over which it can claim jurisdiction.

Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which Russia has ratified and is in force, the criminal jurisdiction of a coastal state operates only within its territorial sea of up to twelve miles.  Beyond that it may have an exclusive economic zone of up to two hundred miles, and a continental shelf may extend even beyond that; but within those zones the rights of coastal states are limited to jurisdiction over economic activity and mineral exploitation.

The Russians appear very aware of the legal position.  When the Greenpeace activists were first arrested, I heard on BBC World Service radio here in Accra a Russian government spokesman say the vessel appeared to be towing a seismic buoy.  Greenpeace explained it was a survival pod.  But the point is, if it had been a seismic buoy, that would have been an economic activity which the Russian government is indeed entitled to regulate, so it was s thought out pretext (though I have no doubt a dishonest one).

Obviously the argument that they were engaged in unlawful economic activity may have justified the original arrest but quickly falls.  What else is left?  The seas above the exclusive economic zone are part of the High Seas – a fact often misunderstood.  The only criminal activity on the High Seas over which a state other than the flag state of the vessel can claim jurisdiction is piracy.  So if the Russians want to bring charges, it is piracy or nothing.

Of course any sensible government would opt for nothing, and accept that demonstrations happen.  The Russian government is not sensible in that sense, and would far rather throw away the international kudos gained over Syria, than admit for one second that Putin is not in complete macho control of absolutely everything.

The stupid thing about all this is that Russia has every legal right to be drilling for oil in the Arctic, a great deal of which is rightly within Russia’s exclusive economic zone.  The Russians have the right to drill, and Greenpeace have the right to protest about it.

What this is not, is piracy.  Greenpeace were not intending to steal or damage any rig, vessel or cargo, or to commit violence.  They were just protesting.  The definition of piracy in UNCLOS is quite clear:

Article 101

Piracy consists of any of the following acts:

(a) any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:

(i) on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;

(ii) against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;

(b) any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c) any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in subparagraph (a) or (b).

 Plainly this is not piracy.” (posted 25/9/13)

The only things to add are

1. The lack of outrage from European governments. Bubble-dwellers across the continent find Greenpeace a nuisance and will not rush to help. 
2. What impact has this had on Edward Snowden? Does he feel that little bit less secure?

Farty Conference Season

Brian Death reporting from the latest corporate funfest gushed about a political leader managing to speak for over an hour -- without notes! Truly this is the way to measure an ability to run the country. Forget content and values ....he spoke without notes!

At the upcoming Tory party funfest, barely one-third of those present will be members. The other two-thirds will comprise mega corps who happen to pay to support ‘initiatives’ and ‘policy research’. The rest will be media bubble dwellers minutely examining every nuance in a desperate attempt to breathe life into a long-dead event. The other two major parties constitute similar set-ups. Even the Lib-Dems, who lasted longest in maintaining at least an element of democracy in their proceedings, finally gave up this year.

Resembling nothing so much as cult leaders spouting to the faithful, farty conferences are way past their credible sell-by date. They do little but remind us of how the bubble-dwellers take after each other. Gone are the days of Kinnock having a go at Militant Tendency.

If the purpose is to allow mega corps access to the political system then it needs to be politely pointed out that they have this facility all year round anyway. [See Update below]

What would be truly novel would be to hold a conference to which any member of the public could go. Further, one in which ordinary folk could have a say in how things are run.

Now that would be worth watching and paying attention to. 


Update 25/9/13

There are several ‘advantages’ for companies hosting events at Farty Conferences. Who would have thought that the Labour Party would allow the Philip Morris tobacco company exhibition space - especially when the company had successfully lobbied to kick the plain packaging of cigarettes into touch? Well they did - and they were paid for doing so. 

The Electoral Reform society has obtained details of party funding and conferences. For instance, the Tory party made over £4 million from selling their conference spaces and access last year. The grassroots of the party, those stalwarts so beloved by Tory ministers,donated about £750,000 in the same year. 

The biggest advantage for ministers and their shadows is that meetings at Farty Conferences are ‘off the record’. Throughout the rest of the year meetings with corporate bosses have to be recorded. 

Now why would any company pay thousands of pounds to a political party to host an event? 
What can they possibly get out of it?

Look at our two-tier society and you will see the result.  

Judge them by their deeds Chapter 35

Little Willy Hague has been at it again. ‘He who has done nothing wrong has nothing to fear’ was his way of not looking at the Snowden revelations. Remember the week before the tories botched their route to another war, it was Hague who banged the war drum most loudly and most often. He invoked ‘tyranny’ and ‘freedom’ among other inspirational words in his desire to be seen as a player on the world stage.

It now emerges that the same Little Willy signed off arms exports to several countries with dubious human rights records, just as he did last year when some arms went to the Syrian regime that he now condemns. Apparently we even sent Syria the ingredients to make Sarin - the gas used in the chemical attacks. 

Other two-faced forked tongue merchants of death are Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, International Development Secretary Justine Greening and not forgetting  Business Secretary Vince Cable. Yes readers - it is true, sadly the venerable Vince is a two-faced twin forked slimeball like the rest. 

Little Willy has done plenty wrong - let us all hope he has plenty to fear.