Why are terror incidents always used as an excuse to cut civil liberties?

Why are incidents like the recent Woolwich killing so hyped up once the link to terrorism is established?

The pattern runs, police or/and security services label the killing terror based. Panic ensues, the government announce in a very loud voice that the COBRA committee is sitting. The implication is always that the incident is not that of isolated maniacs but an international conspiracy of 9/11 type proportions. Muslims as a group are blamed wholesale for any such incident.

The resulting hysteria among the public results in attacks on innocent Muslims. The far right has a field day, playing an active role orchestrating such events.

Finally, the call comes for more powers for the police and security services to lock up and intercept anyone they don’t like the look of.

How different the response is here to say Norway where following the atrocities committed by far right fanatic Anders Breivik, the Prime minister Jens Stoltenberg called for a response that brought "more democracy and more openness." How mature compared to the hysterical rush here to trample on ever more liberties - exactly what the terrorist wanted in the first place ofcourse.

Government punishes domestic migrant workers to reward bad employers

The decision of the government to end the overseas domestic worker visa opens up the opportunity for bad employers to abuse migrant workers.

In many ways the move is so typical of this government, removing rights for some of the worst paid and badly treated workers in the country, all in the name of its ill thought out immigration policy, which appears totally predicated on the need to reduce migrant numbers.

The domestic workers visa had been in operation since 1998, giving workers the possibility to change employers and extend their visas. However, this all ended on 6 April when the domestic worker visa was abandoned on the basis the need to cut net migration. There were 15,745 domestic worker visas issued in 2012, similar to the number for previous years.

The new arrangements see a tied visa introduced which has a maximum duration of six months and ties the worker to the one employer, who brought them to the UK. “It is a terrible reflection on this government to withdraw worker’s rights and protection from what is one of the most vulnerable group of workers.  After all, if you live in the household of your employer you are totally in their control.  Many are literally locked in the house when the employer goes out - and domestic workers in the private household are not included in Health and Safety legislation, nor in the Race Relations Act!” said Sister Margaret Healy, co-founder of the domestic worker campaigning organisations Kalayaan and Justice for Domestic Workers (J4DW).

So the net effect of the changes has been to benefit exploitative employers. Already, statistics gathered by Kalayaan confirm the worsening situation under the new tied visa system.

Some 62 per cent on the tied visa are paid nothing at all compared to 14 per cent under the previous system.  All workers on the tied visa were paid less than £100 a week compared to 14 per cent on the original visa

Sister Healy argues there was no justification for withdrawing the visa. “It has not been abused, the Home Office knows exactly where every domestic worker lives and works because they have to supply this information yearly when they renew their visa.  Just when the International Labour Organisation (ILO - Convention 189) is promoting rights and protections for domestic workers world-wide the UK government withdraws all rights and protections - it is shameful,” said Sister Healy.

It is difficult to make any sense of this latest policy from the Coalition Government. The alleged intention to help cut migration seems unlikely, given that the removal of protections makes it far more likely that desperate workers will leave abusive employment and join the reservoir of undocumented workers. They will be un-trackable for government in this environment and the exchequer will lose the tax and national insurance that previously the workers paid when legitimately employed.

This ridiculous policy benefits no one other than exploitative employers. It can only be hoped that the government listens to the argument of the likes of Kalayaan, J4 DW and Unite who are all calling for restoration of the overseas domestic workers visa with immediate effect.

*For more information contact Kate Roberts, Community Advocate at Kalayaan – tel. 0207 243 2942 or kate@kalayaan.org.uk

Fourth largest economy can afford welfare state

The obsession of the Coalition Government with the need to cut the welfare budget never seems far from the headlines.

It is an area where the spinning of facts is rife in order to produce a narrative that says the welfare state cannot be afforded in its present form.

The fundamental building blocks of the welfare state though as it is known today were put in place by the post war Labour Government. It moved to enact the recommendations of the Beveridge report which was published in 1942. Sir William Beveridge identified what became known as the five giants, Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness.

The reforms proposed marked an essential shift from the Victorian days, when discretionary charity was seen as the answer to poverty, to a system where citizens have a right to welfare support.

Despite the poverty of post war Britain the capacity to pay for this welfare revolution was never in doubt. The welfare state remained an unquestionable facet of the post war consensus for ruling Britain up to the 1980s.

The arrival of the Thatcher Government in 1979 started the chipping away of credibility of the welfare state, though its funding levels remained relatively unscathed.

The tide, though, started to turn in those days. The constant flow of misinformation over the years has now resulted in the Coalition Government launching its all out assault on the welfare state.

It is as though things have almost come full circle with Chancellor George Osborne’s crude stereotyping of skivers and strivers, mirroring the Victorian values of the deserving and undeserving poor.

The result is the introduction of the universal credit, which brings together the jobseekers allowance, income related employment and support allowance income support, child tax credits, working tax credits and housing benefit into one benefit. There is also to be a cap of £500 a week on all benefits received by a household.

The cuts to housing benefits, including the infamous bedroom tax, which penalises people living on benefit in houses where there are spare rooms, aims to slash this budget.



An assault on the disabled has seen 100,000s of people being reassessed in relation to Disablity Living Allowance. Some 560,000 are due to be reassessed by October 2015. Many are expected to lose the benefit altogether as a result of this often dubious process. DLA is to be replaced by the Personal Independence Payment.



All of these changes are premised on the back of much misinformation in the media.

The TUC discovered the extent of misundertstanding when it commissioned a Yougov poll. Researchers found the public believe that 27% of the welfare budget is claimed fraudulently. The actual amount for 2011/12 was 0.8% or £1.2 billion. Similarly, on average people think that 41 per cent of the entire welfare budget goes on benefits to unemployed people, while the true figure is 3 per cent.



There has been much made of those families receiving more in benefits than the median salary of £26,000 a year, so justifying the imposition of the cap. The reality is that it applies to just 58.000 households.



There is so much false information around in the debate on welfare that it makes for a sobering exercise to look at just how the budget does split up. By far the largest part of £166 billion work and pensions budget (2011/12) goes on pensions. Pensions account for £74 billion or 47% of the budget. Pension credit and minimum income guarantee benefit account for another £8 billion. Housing benefit costs £17 billion and disability living allowance £13 billion. Incapacity benefit and jobseekers allowance account for £5 billion a piece.



There is also a double standard about welfare. Take housing benefit where the focus is on the family receiving thousands in benefits. Never is the focus on the greedy landlords who keep pushing up rents. Rent controls rarely get a mention, yet the rack renting landlords are also welfare benefit cheats.



Tax credits are another area where the bad employer paying poverty wages does not seem to receive the same level of criticism regarding welfare as the single parent struggling by. In effect via tax credits, people are not only being helped into work but a subsidy is being provided to employers who want to pay poverty wages.

The result of the present stripping away of the welfare state is already being seen with a doubling in the number of people going to food banks over the past year. The food banks are a charitable response to poverty of the type seen in the 19th century when the poor laws and workhouses scarred the landscape.

There seems little doubt that the Britain can afford the welfare state. The approach of the present government as in so many things is using a crisis to achieve idealogically driven goals that impoverish growing numbers of people.

Welfare for low paying businesses or rack renting landlords is apparently fine. Would the argument about funding welfare even be on the table if the £42 billion in tax being avoided by companies and individuals were being paid?

The challenge now must be to defend the right of citizens to cradle to grave welfare. The lies and misrepresentations now being used need to be exposed in order to halt the charge backwards to the days of charitable provision and the workhouse.

9/5/2013 Morning Star

TUC general secretary challenges unions and Labour Party to deliver radical new economic settlement

TUC general secretary Frances O'Grady has warned that both unions and the Labour Party will need to change to deliver a radical new economic settlement that will lift the UK out of a lost decade of stagnation.


Delivering the annual Attlee lecture at Oxford University, Frances warned that the Labour Party must make a break from New Labour managerialism and the idea that deregulated markets can be given a human face.

She also warned that unions cannot retreat into a comfort zone of narrow sectionalism or oppositionism.

“Both Labour and unions must learn from the lessons of the past, in order to forge a new ideological settlement for post-crash Britain,” said Frances. 'If we are to build a future that works for all, then both sides of the labour movement need to change.

'For the Party, there must be a decisive break with New Labour managerialism, the notion that deregulated markets can somehow be given a human face.

'And for us in the trade unions, there can be no retreat into a comfort zone of narrow sectionalism or oppositionism. Our long-term viability ultimately rests on our capacity to shape a new economy, not from the sidelines but from within.'

Looking ahead to the challenge facing unions, Frances said: 'Unions need to be smart and realistic about what we seek from a new settlement. Much as we would like the next Labour government to be like a videotape run backwards undoing all the coalition policies we dislike, we have to recognise that there will be a difficult and different starting point.

'Of course we need to undo the damage done by this government and the crash, but there will need to be new thinking and a recognition that not everything will be achieved at once.

'That does not mean that we in the trade union movement be timid in what we seek. We know that even with an end to forced austerity, there will no longer be the illusory resources generated by the finance bubble. But if there is less to spend, then we need to look for precisely the big structural changes in the economy that the last Labour government shied away from.

She called for a future Labour Government to properly deal with problems such as low pay, not spray money at them by subsidising poor employers.

'And in seeking radical economic change, unions need to avoid the strategic error we made after the war. We should embrace industrial democracy and take up every chance to redefine economic relationships. Trade unions cannot afford to stand aside as we did after 1945. This time, history would simply pass us by,” said Frances.

'In the future, unions and working people need to be at the heart of the economy, having an effective voice, winning fairness, building the businesses that will deliver our prosperity in the decades to come. That poses a challenge to government, to business and to managers.”

A strong believer in the concept of the common good, Frances said “Most of all, industrial democracy poses a challenge to us in the trade union movement. It implies a role that is not just more ambitious, but more demanding, than the one we usually have now. It means accepting responsibility, moving out of a comfort zone of short-termism, to taking the long view and championing the greater good.'

Zambian academic calls on those seeking to change the world to start with themselves

A Zambian academic has called on those seeking to change the world to start with themselves.



Addressing the 25th anniversary celebration of the Africa-Europe Faith and Justice Network at Westminster Hall, Martin Kalungu-Banda, Fellow at Future Considerations Oxford, told how growing up in Zambia he had one pair of shoes, a couple of shirts and little else. In the consumerist world, living in Britain he can have any number of shoes and shirts but he questioned whether he should whilst those in Zambia continue to grow up the way that he did.



“I should not buy my child that third or fourth toy, they are not needed,” said Mr Kalunga Banda, who stressed that if as Christians we start showing this example of more simple living it will effect the family and in time these same people can become the government ministers and business leaders of tomorrow. “Politicians and business leaders are not made of different stuff from ourselves,” said Mr Kalunga Banda.



The academic highlighted three divides in the world: ecological, social and spiritual. The ecological divide sees a world where 1.5 planets would be required to support the present lifestyles of the west for all. The social divide sees almost three billion people living on less than US$2 a day and not knowing where their next loaf is coming from. The spiritual divide means that three in 10 contemplate suicide at some time in life. “Whether we like it or not we are each others keeper because billions going to bed every day does not make for a safe world,” said Mr Kalunga Banda,



Jenny Brown, the senior European Union relations adviser at Christian Aid, told how much damage is being done worldwide by individuals and companies not paying their taxes. Developing countries lose US$160 billion a year in tax they are owed with half of world trade going through tax havens which enable lower payment of taxes,” said Ms Brown, who argued that tax improves the accountability of governments and is more reliable and sustainable than aid..



Ms Brown explained how things were changing for the better, with pressure for disclosure of more information on companies and moves to get rid of the secrecy of tax havens. She urged those present to lobby the Government to do more to stop tax dodging by British companies.

State run East Coast mainline requires least public subsidy, so let's reprivatise it

The state-run East Coast rail service requires less public subsidy than any of the 15 privately run rail franchises in Britain, according to a report from the rail regulator.

The route has been under the control of the Department for Transport since November 2009, being run by Directly Owned Railways, after the transport company National Express pulled out

 

Directly Owned Railways posted results for the last year showing turnover of £665.8 million, an increase of £20 million, leaving a profit before tax and service payments to the Department for Transport of £195.7 million, an increase of £13 million.

 

Passenger journeys at East Coast, which runs trains from London to Yorkshire, the North East and Scotland, increased by 2.1%

 

Customer satisfaction at East Coast rose by 2%, and the latest punctuality figures were its best since records began in 1999

What’s not to like? Well ask our back to the future government which is pushing ahead with putting the East Coast mainline back into private hands by February 2015.

Cull of J&P workers continues despite election of social justice Pope

The news that Leeds Diocese has got rid of its Justice and Peace worker, with Wrexham reviewing the situation came through just as the very social justice orientated Pope Frances was being inaugurated in Rome.

The extinguishing of the J&P position in Leeds confirms a recent trend. Shrewsbury got rid of its worker last year with Salford and Portsmouth terminating the role before that. It’s not all one way traffic though with Nottingham recently appointing a new worker.

There are now 10 workers, mostly part time, in the 22 diocese across England and Wales. So is there a concerted effort to remove J&P from the Church landscape by the death of a thousand financial cuts?

The move seems strangely timed coming just as we see the election of probably the most openly committed social justice Pope for many a decade. Pope Francis hails from Latin America, the home of liberation theologians like Gustavo Guittierez, Jon Sobrino and Helda Camra. He has been famed for his humble style of living, taking the bus and cooking his own food.

Less well recognised in this country is that the justice and peace movement in the UK was a manifestation of the very same source as the liberation theology of Latin America.

In the modern epoch, social justice activists worldwide took their motivation from Vatican II. The justice and peace movement in Britain came to epitomise the call from Pope John XXIII to open the windows of the Church and engage with the world. The J&P movement brought through some of the leading social justice activists of the past 30 years.

Leeds Justice and Peace Commission for instance was the place where former Labour MP John Battle and former CAFOD director Julian Filochowski cut their formative teeth in social justice. Former Progressio executive director Christine Allen was J&P worker in Liverpool. Bruce Kent has always been a close ally of J&P from his days as a priest in Westminster. The list goes on.

In the early days, activists set about creating a network across the country, helped immensely by CAFOD, which funded workers and commissions. Under the guidance of Mr Filochowski this relationship blossomed, with CAFOD in exchange for the funding gaining a ready-made network of activists on the ground to do its work. There was also adult education and formation going on at this time.

Notably, in the light of what has happened recently, diocesan funding was lacking for the work, with bishops happy to sit back and let CAFOD pick up the bills in many cases.

A crucial development in the social justice structure was the creation of the National Justice and Peace Network (NJPN). This became the co-ordinating body for justice and peace work across England and Wales. A co-ordinating and development point for workers and commissions across the diocese.

Part of its mission was running the annual conference. This brought together activists from across the country. It remains one of the biggest gatherings of Church people in the UK, offering a unique networking opportunity for those involved in social justice.

The conference takes a different theme each year. The focus last year was on China, prior to that dignity in the workplace, food security and migration featured.

The conference though has an equally important solidarity role providing an opportunity for everyone gathered together to realise that they are all banging their heads on the same wall – just in different parts of the country.

When NJPN was set up, the conference was just to be part of its work. Unfortunately, over the ensuing years, the conference has come to dominate the NJPN agenda. It is a huge undertaking requiring much effort by a small number of people but should it be the central focus?

There are now quarterly speaking meetings between conferences but there is the lack of any coherent programme linking it all together.

Perhaps after each conference the NJPN ought to set up a standing committee to take the work on that area forward. This would take resources but over a period would lead to a body of knowledge and expertise being created that was not available elsewhere.

Remarkably, the attitude of NJPN to actions like the cutting of J&P workers seems to be to issue regretful statements and carry on. There is never a discussion about what the network is about, how it should respond etc. When was the last time we saw a picket of diocesan offices protesting about the removal of J&P workers?

A major problem with NJPN is that it does politics but is not political. As a result it seems the network is being chipped away at by those in the Church hierarchy who control the purse strings.

Notably, the NJPN application for funding from the Plater College Trust this year was turned down, despite the theme being “leadership for the laity, particularly in the area of social justice and social action, to equip individual Catholics to apply Catholic social teaching and play an active role in the Church’s mission.” The £183,280 was considered better spent elsewhere.

The hierarchy seem to believe that social justice work can be done better, via the likes of Caritas Social Action Network (CSAN). There seems to be no shortage of money to support CSAN, with individual diocese like Westminster and Salford employing their own workers.

The hierarchy no doubt see CSAN as something that can be more easily controlled but they might also believe it does more in a measurable sense regarding social justice work.

Whatever the truth of the matter there is a clear preferential option for CSAN operating among the hierarchy of the Church.

Something though that has been surprising is the rapidity with which justice and peace seems to have been moved into the position of outlaw status. This ofcourse could be the movement’s salvation, as it realises what is happening regarding the institutional church, it may discover a stronger prophetic voice. There may ofcourse also be a sea change emanating from Rome, now that Pope Francis is in charge.

What is for certain is that if NJPN wants to remain as a serious player in the Church structures then it will have to start becoming political pretty quickly, just continuing with this head in the sand attitude as one J&P worker after another falls can only in the long term lead to elimination from the scene.

see also -

18/4/2013 - Guardian diary: jobs gone; more in peril. No sanctuary in the Catholic church

Tablet - Who will speak out for the threatened Justice and Peace movement