tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-58534190622900321922024-03-13T17:48:04.973+00:00Colin FoxColinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.comBlogger468125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-22598812299096131852018-06-25T14:05:00.001+01:002018-06-25T14:05:10.948+01:00My recent speech to an Edinburgh South Independence Rally 16.6.18 <br />
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Thank you for the invitation
to join you here this afternoon at this Independence Rally in The Inch. Shame about the weather. </span></div>
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I have just come from
the SSP’s now famous campaign stall on Princes Street where we champion the need for a
£10/hour wage. And I know you will all want to sign the petition on our stall
over here.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">CROSSROADS</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Friends, the Independence
movement has reached a crossroads with the publication of the SNP’s
Sustainable Growth Commission report recently because it shows we still need to decide
what Independence is actually for, what kind of nation we are out to build, and which
Scots will benefit most.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Some see Independence as the
continuation of what we have now with economic and political power transferred from
one wealthy elite to another. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I don’t.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Some believe we need to water
down our commitments to the most deprived and vulnerable Scots to please the
moneymen and the selfish middle class. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I don’t.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Some think we need to stress
how little will change with Independence to placate those most reluctant to embrace
it. I</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;"> don’t.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">For me Independence is all about
change. That is its greatest asset. It’s about transforming the Scotland we all
see today; about eradicating the grotesque inequalities and intolerable deprivation
that blights places like The Inch, about dumping economic & social attitudes
and laws that hold back millions of people and shackles us to a rotten,
exploitative system that forces misery on most and ugly opulence for an out of
touch elite.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">That Britain is a failing
state. I’m not out to win the great prize of Independence against all odds and
after great sacrifice just to establish a replica of it just to please
financiers and aristocrats. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">The Sustainable Growth
Commission poses a vision of Independence I do not support. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It promises ten years of
austerity after Independence. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It promises to leave us
vulnerable to economic decisions others take with no control over our currency,
interest rates or flights of capital. That’s not Independence.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It seeks to ‘transition’
Scotland to Independence by changing very little; keeping the Pound, staying in
NATO, maintaining a feudal monarchy with its divine right of Queens and
hereditary principles over a meritocracy with democracy and equality. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It’s that conservatism that
lost us the last Referendum. And it will lose us the next one too. </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It’s not ‘transition’ we need
its transformation. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I am not a nationalist. I am
a socialist who supports Independence as a democratic right of a free people
held back by a political union that oppresses working class people. I do not
support a prospectus that makes Scotland’s working-class majority worse off.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Independence must be about
something better. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">It must be about redistributing
this country’s vast wealth, taking some of it from those who have too much to give
to those who have too little. It must be about public ownership and satisfying universal
need not feeding private greed. It must be about unleashing the enormous
technological and scientific riches humankind has bestowed on us for everyone’s
benefit!</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">WINNING ‘INDYREF2’ </span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I agree with Nicola Sturgeon
when she says we need to spend more time persuading our fellow Scots about the merits
of Independence rather than obsessing over the timing of INDYREF2. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">But we also need to stop
obsessing over Brexit and accept that the majority of Scots who voted to Remain
did so without any great love for an institution that does not serve their
interests nor the peoples of Europe. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I see the hand of big
business behind that obsession because Brexit poses the loss of cheap labour
and easy profits for them. They wouldn’t have a labour shortage if they paid the
Living wage!<span style="margin: 0px;"> </span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">We are behind in the opinion polls
as things stand and will not win a second vote unless we spell out more
persuasively what Independence is for. Victory can only be achieved by painting
a much better economic and political prospectus!</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">And to those who say </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">‘But Colin, let’s get
Independence first, then settle all these other questions later’ I say </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">‘No. It is not possible to
win Independence without first explaining what it is for and what it will look
like. Otherwise you are asking people to sign a blank cheque! That will never
happen.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">And to those who say </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">‘But, we start at 45% support
today. When the campaign really gets going we can race ahead just as we did between
2012-14.’ </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">That’s not a persuasive argument
either. I was around in 2012-14. That period is gone forever. Political battles
are not like some TV repeat where the same plot develops over & over &
over. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">A 2<sup>nd</sup> Referendum, whenever
we have it, will look nothing like the last one. The dynamics will be completely
different. Some people who voted YES last time will vote NO now & vice
versa. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Losing a second time however will
kill our movement stone dead like it did in Quebec. I don’t want that.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Our movement remains at a huge
disadvantage until we are clear about what we want. We have skirted too many
fundamental issues in an attempt to build unity. But unity for unity’s sake is
not enough. Victory lies ahead only if we agree on the need for profound
improvement for working people. Maintaining the status quo is not a victory
option.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px;"> </span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">We have time so let’s use it.
Let’s stop running around like headless chickens waving flags and mumbling
mindless platitudes. Let’s start finding solutions to the challenges that confront
us.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">OUR CASE NOT STRONG ENOUGH YET</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">The need for Independence is
as strong as ever. But the truth is, as we all know, our case is not strong
enough, not yet. We have still not persuaded the majority of Scots to back our
case. We trail in all the polls. We still talk to ourselves too much and do too
little to build extra support. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">REMAIN POSITIVE BUT WORK ON MORE PERSUASIVE ARGUMENTS</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">The case for Independence is
powerful. Britain is a failing state. Working people in Scotland can be
persuaded of our case if we offer them the promise of a better world without
insecurity and exploitation, where the nations enormous assets belong to us all
and the fruits are shared out between us all, where the people are sovereign
and we are at peace with the rest of this world. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">I want an independent
socialist Scotland, a modern democratic republic, and I believe that remains a
powerfully attractive goal. We need to turn that dream into a reality.<span style="font-size: small;"> </span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">END<span style="margin: 0px;"> </span></span></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-39757345075142129202017-11-22T14:38:00.000+00:002017-11-22T14:47:03.433+00:00Despite attempted obfuscation Hammond's Budget maintains Tory austerity<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: left;">
<b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; margin: 0px;">UK Chancellor Philip Hammond today delivered his Budget and made clear austerity remains the centrepiece of Tory economic policy despite dismal growth rates which were again downgraded for 2017-2019 to 1.5% [from 2% forecast in March], 1.4% and 1.3% respectively</span>.</b> </div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: left;">
If poverty wages, insecure employment, the chronic shortage of affordable housing and deepening indebtedness are to be ended it will only be mass action by working people that achieves it. </div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: left;">
The SNP Scottish Government and Labour Councils need to add to their rhetoric against austerity, poverty pay and public sector cuts with effective political action. They have a pitifully poor record on this score over the past 8 years it must be said. For working people Hammond's Budget represents more of the same misery. That's why the Scottish Socialist Party will continue to campaign for a package of proposals designed to materially advance the lives of ordinary people<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; margin: 0px;">; </span></div>
<div style="line-height: normal; margin: 0px; text-align: left;">
-A £10/hour living wage to end poverty pay and boost consumer spending, </div>
-Replace the Council tax with an income based alternative lifting the burden of payment off the shoulders of those least able to pay,<br />
-Introduce free public transport to combat climate change and give people a more attractive alternative to their cars,<br />
-Return our railways to public hands,<br />
-Return our energy industry to public hands to end the scourge of fuel poverty once and for all<br />
-Provide free access to the internet for all under 25, <br />
-Provide residential elderly care free [to add to Scotland's free personal care]<br />
-Implement a massive programme of publicly owned affordable house building for rent <br />
To be paid for in part by closing down the tax havens protected by UK law exposed by the Paradise Papers to ensure the wealthy can no longer escape their obligations to society. And by cancelling the £100bn due to be spent on a second generation of Trident nuclear missiles stationed on the Clyde. <br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: left;">
</div>
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: center;">
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike></div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-33190138010625477932017-10-12T20:09:00.002+01:002017-10-12T20:09:16.820+01:00Back to the drawing board for the Independence movement in Catalonia and Scotland
<br />
<h2 style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: left;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Has he or hasn’t he? That is the question. Has Catalan
President Carles Puigdemont declared Independence or not? Has the October 1<sup>st</sup>
Referendum he organised, where 90% of voters opted to become an independent
republic, given him a mandate or not? Have the people of
Catalonia spoken or not? If so, what have they said? For it is not at all
clear. </span></h2>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">On the one hand Senor Puigdemont appears to have declared Independence only to suspend it for a week to allow negotiations between him and the Spanish
Government to take place. Whilst the Referendum, declared illegal by the
Spanish state and conducted under duress, resulted in a huge majority for
Independence its validity is contested. The Catalan President insisted such an
outcome would mean he had secured a mandate to declare
Independence for Catalonia. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Whilst 90% of voters backed Independence the turnout was
just 43% meaning most Catalans ignored the ballot. Both sides, for and against
Independence, claim to have the majority behind them. The mood of the Catalan people is not at all clear as the massive demonstrations mobilised by all three sides in the conflict [those for independence, against and in favour of some negotiated
dialogue with Madrid] showed. Each failed to conclusively prove where the majority
of Catalans stand on the issue.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Furthermore the Catalan Government is now completely isolated
at home and abroad in the ‘corridors of power. It has little support in
the rest of Spain where all four main parties PP, PSOE, Podemos and Cuidadanos
oppose Independence. The Spanish Constitution expressly prohibits secession by any
of its constituent regions/nations without the consent of all others. And the ‘International
community’ so called considers the matter an internal Spanish issue in which it is steadfastly
determined not to become embroiled. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, leader of the
conservative Popular Party [PP] government, has threatened to impose
direct rule from Madrid the moment Puidgemont declares UDI. And despite the huge political escalation this action would induce –
alienating Catalans even further from the Government in Madrid - no one doubts
he will do so. The Spanish state will simply not allow Catalonia to secede. Its provocative
use of the Civil Guards and Spanish police on the streets of Catalonia on
October 1<sup>st</sup> left few in any doubt about the seriousness of its
intentions. Rajoy knows the implications of Independence in Catalonia for
politics across Spain - in the Basque country, Galicia and the Valencien community - would be incendiary. The break-up of Spain has been sharply posed and the forces of capital are not prepared to countenance such
a possibility.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">There was therefore only ever one outcome
here. The independence movement in Catalonia has too little power. Worse, it has shown
it was unprepared for this particular conflict. It now risks being routed by the emboldened Spanish
state. The tactics the Independence movement employed in Catalonia in holding
this referendum may well have back fired. It has not persuaded a majority
of Catalans to support Independence. It has grievously underestimated the powers the
Spanish state would employ against it and the huge inequity in the power
relations it faced here. Moreover it has also threatened to split the governing coalition of Puidgemont’s centre-right
nationalist party and the hard Left CUP [Popular Front].</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Rajoy may in due course
offer further devolution and increased funds to Catalonia in an effort to undermine the potency of the Independence cause. But this is unlikely in the short term. M</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">eantime it looks like it is back to the
drawing board for the Independence movement in Catalonia, just as in
Scotland where following Nicola Sturgeons own INDYREF2 blunder morale
has also been sapped.</span></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-70984650404372865892017-09-11T10:32:00.004+01:002017-09-11T10:32:48.676+01:00'Brexit' negotiations underway with neither side representing the working class
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Westminster
MP’s vote tonight on the Government’s EU Withdrawal Bill with the Tories widely
expected to win with the support of their allies the loyalist DUP. The vote
draws attention again to the ‘Brexit’ negotiations now well underway.
And perhaps the most important point about them, one universally ignored by
the mainstream media, is that neither side represents the interests of working
class people, anywhere. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
I <span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">argued for a Remain vote back in June 2016. I did so on
the basis it was ‘the lesser of two evils’. The European Union is, as far as I'm concerned, no friend of working people. It is an institution firmly rooted
in post war Western European capitalism. Today it is firmly in the grip of
neo-liberal free market capitalist corporations. It exists to ensure these multinational
corporations profit, without tariff or interference, from exploiting 550milion Europeans.
Treaty after treaty [Rome, Maastricht, Nice, Lisbon, Dublin] all ensured their interests
were sacrosanct and put ahead of the peoples of Europe. Despite purporting
to be ‘democratic’ the EU is in fact run by and for the interests of big
business/capital. It is an instrument which exists to exploit their
interests. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">I therefore
have no illusions in the EU, its character, purpose or negotiators. But, you may ask why, in
that case did I call for a vote for Britain to ‘Remain’ inside this corrupt
and undemocratic organisation? </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Answer. Because the ‘Leave’ case on offer was even more unattractive. Led by the
extreme Right of the Conservative Party its central promise was to roll back
the clock and ‘take back control’ of economic and political decision making. But control for whom? Led by ‘Little
Englanders’ who had no intentions of advancing the interests of working people anywhere,
the ‘Leave’ campaign was not led by the Left. It was a narrow-minded xenophobic
array led by dinosaurs like Nigel Farage, Boris Johnston, Michael Gove and other enemies of
working people.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">The
British electorate voted to ‘Leave’ however. And as democrats we must accept
the result. To do otherwise is to stand alongside the world’s ‘democracy
deniers’. That’s no place for socialists. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">So the
‘Brexit’ negotiations are now underway with neither side representing the
interests of working class people. The ‘Brexiteers in Chief’ David Davies and Liam
Fox are both arch Thatcherites with a record of reaction and privatisation as
bad as any. They fully intend to shackle working people further and so do the
EU negotiators who have their own punishments in store.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">Working
people across Europe face the same struggle. Greedy, exploitative employers wish us to work longer for less. They introduced zero hour contracts increasing the insecurity of working class people everywhere. And they
have all moved to replace full time, permanent jobs on decent
pay and trade’s union rights with insecure, part-time, casual, low paid and
often humiliating conditions. Their profits have mushroomed as insecurity and
indebtedness have wreaked havoc on working class communities throughout the
continent. The rich have become obscenely richer whilst most of us have seen our
living standards fall.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">The
SSP has no faith in the EU, its leaders or institutions. They are part of the
problem facing working class people across Europe not its solution. The illusions pedalled in these institutions particularly by ‘Remainers’ who lost
the 2016 Referendum are criminal. Working class Europeans have, as they say in the United
States, ‘No skin in this game’. Both sides of the negotiating table are intent on signing a deal which
further exploits working people across this continent. Neither w</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">ant a £10/hour Living Wage and permanent, secure contracts of employment with
full trade’s union protections. Neither want </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">the riches of Europe publicly owned and controlled for the benefit of everyone. And neither side want that wealth shared out
among all the peoples of Europe starting with the poorest first.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">The task therefore facing working class people across Europe is to
link up and build a common treasury for all. Not allow xenophobes and
exploiters to divide us up so that we end up fighting one another instead of our
common enemy. That’s the true internationalism behind our call for a People’s Europe.
</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">I campaigned for a vote to stay in the EU to work with 550milion other
Europeans to reform it from top to bottom. Reform it democratically since none
of the EU leaders are elected by anyone. Reform it socially to ensure it serves
the interests of working people not financiers in London, Frankfurt, Paris,
Milan or Edinburgh for that matter. </span></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-87830629177254685842017-08-24T19:54:00.001+01:002017-08-24T19:54:55.276+01:00Ultimate fight weekend arrives as world watches Mayweather vs McGregor<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Mixed
Martial Arts or the Ultimate Fighting Championship [UFC] is brutal. If first impressions last longest mines was horror. A mixture of boxing,
wrestling and jujitsu UFC fighters can punch, elbow, knee, kick,
choke, cripple and thump opponents senseless even when they are down and unconscious
until the referee intervenes. One can only imagine what the sport is like at lower levels away from the prying eyes of TV
cameras and pundits. My teenage son introduced it to me one
Saturday morning at 3am last year as it was broadcast live on BT Sports. It woke me with
a jolt I can tell you. There is no way I’d ever want him to do it.</span></span><br />
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">UFC fighters
meet in a cage or ‘octagon’ and the showtime pzazz surrounding it, like the carnage,
is incessant. Needless to say contestants are mainly black, hispanic, eastern
European or poor whites as is the case with the sports undisputed star and two
category World Champion Irishman Conor McGregor. They all come from poor,
working class backgrounds. McGregor, from the tough, impoverished Dublin housing scheme
of Crumlin, is no exception.</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Boxing is of
course no different in its recruitment demographic. Floyd Mayweather, his
opponent in Saturday nights ‘megafight’ under the Marquis of Queensberry's rules is black, and although now reputedly worth
$250m after an unblemished 49-0 professional record, he emerged from poor
neighbourhoods in Michigan and New Jersey.</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The fight
in Las Vegas this weekend will bring both fighters [and their huge entourages] $100m
a piece as a worldwide audience hands over an estimated $500m to watch via
pay per view or ringside in the massive T-Mobile Arena Las Vegas where, such has been the
demand for tickets that a $1,000 ringside seat was this week being exchanged for $100,000!</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Although
now 40 years of age [and 12 years older than his opponent] with a shorter reach
and a defensive style Mayweather is nonetheless considered the hot favourite.
Tempted out of retirement by the staggering purse his compensatory advantage
is the fact he is fighting under the rules of his sport and not McGregor’s.
Incredible as it may seem McGregor has never had a single professional fight
under boxing rules. And although boxing is his
speciality in UFC bouts he has never fought an opponent in a 12 round purely boxing contest before. What a debut then!</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">For boxing purists this makes a mockery of their sport. They consider it a vulgar and greedy mismatch.
Worse, they fear a victory for McGregor [however unlikely] will render boxing ridiculous and
plunge it into even greater doldrums than it presently inhabits. They
hope and expect McGregor to get ‘whupped’. But their first preference would probably
be for another undoubted showman like him to emerge and take their sport forward
with such pzazz as the Irishman has exhibited in the UFC.<span style="margin: 0px;"> </span>Mayweather simply cannot match
the Irishman for braggadocio and bullish one liners. Comparisons with the young
Cassius Clay/Muhamad Ali are glib and over the top, but McGregor has certainly copied
‘the greatest’ in his pre-fight hype. Win or lose he and his UFC
people have succeeded in putting their sport centre stage as far as the world’s
attention is concerned this weekend. I'll certainly be watching to see if McGregor can possibly defy all the odds.</span></span></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike><span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><b></b>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-84977408615439963272017-03-29T10:08:00.001+01:002017-03-29T10:09:16.787+01:00Edinburgh People's Festival commemorates Antonio Gramsci on 80th anniversary of his death<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QaMVT-inNZs/WNt5KLgwoOI/AAAAAAAABSo/PGcanqhwNt8nKlKRi8n87ngNvNBOoJRdgCLcB/s1600/EPF-Gramsci%2Btalk-eflyer%2B2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QaMVT-inNZs/WNt5KLgwoOI/AAAAAAAABSo/PGcanqhwNt8nKlKRi8n87ngNvNBOoJRdgCLcB/s400/EPF-Gramsci%2Btalk-eflyer%2B2.jpg" width="282" /></a></div>
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-25123548082861004902017-01-24T15:07:00.001+00:002017-01-24T15:07:35.892+00:00MAY'S LOSS ON SUPREME COURT RULING IS LESS THAN NICOLA STURGEON'S
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Today’s ruling by the UK Supreme Court that the Government
must seek Parliaments consent before signing Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and
begin Britain's formal exit from the EU comes amid dramatically different political
circumstances from those in early December when the case was heard.</span><br />
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Then the judgement threatened to throw Theresa May’s ‘Brexit’
plans into chaos. There was speculation that a Parliament stacked with a huge majority of MP's who had voted to Remain might thwart Brexit. And there was a bitter and unseemly intra-establishment row between ‘Remainers’
paying for a last gasp legal attempt to overthrow the wishes of the electorate
and ‘Brexiteers’ accusing the courts of interfering with equally
anti-democratic monarchical powers to plough on regardless of Parliament's wishes. </span><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Now however Theresa May’s hand appears immensely stronger. Her
aim to sign Article 50 by the end of March is back on track. </span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">What caused the
turnaround? The answer is that the die-hard ‘Remainers’ looked over the
cliff edge and decided they did not have the stomach for defying
voters after all. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">May’s ‘Article 50’ Bill with its ‘Hard Brexit’ plan to halt the
free movement of labour, stop payments to the EU and extricate Britain from
the European Courts of Justice will be given the green
light within weeks. All Tory MP’s will vote for it and so will two thirds of
Labour’s. Which leaves only right-wing Labour ‘rebels’, 6 Lib Dems and the SNP huddled
together in the ‘No’ Lobby. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Where does this leave the case for Scottish Independence? The
short answer is not in a good place. The SNP have spent 7 months
grandstanding and using Independence as some EU bargaining chip. Their bluff has
been called time and time again. In June Nicola Sturgeon promised
to ignore the UK vote and somehow keep Scotland inside the EU. She
jetted round European capitals ‘sooking up’ to as many EU leaders as would
meet her seeking help to thwart ‘Scexit’. As widely anticipated she got
nowhere with either gambit. Next she insisted she would get Scotland a seat on
the UK negotiating team. Having failed to deliver that too she finally warned she
was ‘not bluffing’ over INDYREF2 and there must not be a ‘Hard Brexit’. If Scotland
did not get to remain in the Single Market she would ‘almost, almost, almost
inevitably’ call a [legally unenforceable] second Referendum. She did nothing
of the kind of course. And today her ludicrous plan to use the ‘powers’ in the Sewell Convention have been utterly dismissed
by eleven Supreme Court Justices. </span><span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">And the reason for not delivering a single one of her threats? Her impotence. Even the dogs in the street
know she is bluffing over INDYREF2. Neither Nicola Sturgeon nor anyone else in
the YES side is going to hold a second referendum while the polls are this bad.
Support for Independence is not only in the minority it has been falling since
June! </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The same conservative SNP who infer Nicola will gamble on ‘one last throw of the dice’ know she has not made the case for
Independence for two years now. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">As the Scottish Socialist Party and others have been
pointing out for months the EU is not the issue upon which to win INDYREF2. The
EU is an anti-democratic bosses club in the grip of the same neo-liberal
capitalism that was rejected in Britain in June [and the US in November]. It is
no friend of working people. The SSP called for a ‘Remain’ vote in June as the ‘lesser of two evils’. Now that the verdict has been delivered we must all respect
it and leave.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Nicola Sturgeon has ignored all else in her ‘in tray’ these
past 7 months in order to highlight the ‘democratic deficit’ inherent in the
June 23</span><sup><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: x-small;">rd</span></sup><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> vote. But she has ‘over egged the pudding’. For that particular
‘democratic deficit’ is not the only one Scots have suffered in recent years. And
neither it is the most egregious. The war in Iraq and the Poll tax were even more offensive. Neither are such ‘democratic deficits’ all there
is to the case for Independence. We will only win the vote for Independence
when we can prove to Scotland’s working class majority they will be
economically, socially </span><u><span style="font-family: Calibri;">and</span></u><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> politically better off that way. Threatening INDYREF2 is not the same as making the case for Independence. That case has not
been made and that is why we lag in the polls. Moreover increasingly frequent
warnings from the SNP Deputy Leader and others that working class Scots will be
worse off for the first 5 years of Independence at least is only going to prolong our
minority status.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The psephologists Professor John Curtice and Dr Craig Dalyell
have both shown the immensely more difficult challenges facing the YES campaign
second time round. Some 13% of YES voters have moved to NO because of fears
about the state of the Scottish economy. And the full impact of that journey is
only now being revealed as it has been masked by the 14% of No voters who had moved
in the other direction because they wanted to keep Scotland inside the EU. As
that is clearly not going to happen they may drift back.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Rather than making an opportunist and undeliverable case for
keeping Scotland in the anti-democratic neo-liberal EU as the SNP leadership
has done the wider Independence movement needs to concentrate on making the fundamental
- economic, social and political - case for self-determination. We have wasted
2 years waiting on the SNP to do it. </span></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike><b></b><b></b>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-10287682537657702542017-01-12T20:20:00.001+00:002017-01-12T20:22:03.883+00:00Dont Miss the Edinburgh Peoples Festival's 'Burns Night on the Beach' <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cU5BlsqxVCw/WHfkmfA6n1I/AAAAAAAABSM/CER8cDVdUh8BlV0euEbEUeTCzgPBFwigACLcB/s1600/BotB2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cU5BlsqxVCw/WHfkmfA6n1I/AAAAAAAABSM/CER8cDVdUh8BlV0euEbEUeTCzgPBFwigACLcB/s400/BotB2.jpg" width="282" /></a></div>
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-42941103131153690022016-12-06T08:52:00.002+00:002016-12-06T08:52:59.796+00:00BRITISH 'DEMOCRACY' UNDER THE MICROSCOPE AS SUPREME COURT RULES ON ARTICLE 50
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px 0px 11px; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 14pt; line-height: 107%; margin: 0px;">
</span></b></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Britain’s decision to
leave the EU is being scrutinised by the highest constitutional court in the
land. And in doing so the case has put UK ‘democracy’ under the microscope. Eleven
unelected Supreme Court ‘Justices’ will rule on whether the UK Government has
the legal right to use autocratic, monarchical ‘Crown Powers’ to override our
elected Parliament’s right to ‘interpret’ the wishes of the British people as expressed
in a democratic referendum. </span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">It all sounds like an episode of ‘Yes Minister’ or ‘In the Thick of it’. </span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Judges insist they
are above politics and always reach their decisions based only on matters
of law – matters passed into law by Parliament and therefore political by their
very nature.</span><span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Ostensibly the case in
front of the UK Supreme Court turns on whether the Government has the right to
sign Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty triggering Britain’s formal departure from
the European Union, without going back to Parliament for permission and uses
the archaic ‘Crown Powers’ vested in the office of the Prime Minister Theresa
May by the Queen instead. </span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The High Court
judgement in October ruled that the power to sign Article 50 fell under the
jurisdiction of the European Communities Act 1972 passed by Westminster, as
such was a matter ‘domestic UK law’ and therefore required the assent of
Parliament. The Government on the other hand claims Article 50 of the
Lisbon Treaty falls under Britain’s International Treaty obligations and
therefore does not require Parliamentary permission as such decisions are routinely
dealt with under ‘The Crown Powers in Parliament’. Those who claim the British
monarchy is powerless and largely confined to a figurehead role might like to pay
close attention here as their view appears to be again exposed by the facts of this case.</span><span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Obscured beneath all
this legal finery is the naked politics. The High Court injunction was brought
by two wealthy ‘Remain’ campaigners, investment fund manager Gina Miller and society
hairdresser Dier Dos Santos who admit their objective was to overturn or at
least slow the entire Brexit process. Moreover the three Judges involved earlier were outspoken
‘advocates’ of a Remain vote. They are of course ‘horrified’ at the suggestion
their verdict was influenced by their political convictions insisting they are both
obliged to, and capable of, putting aside their own political opinions in such
circumstances and backgrounds. Of course! </span><span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></span></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Meanwhile the UK
Government is privately resigned to losing their Supreme Court Appeal and has
tabled a one line Short Bill for Parliament seeking Westminster’s assent to invoke
Article 50 formally in March. </span></span></div>
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-42919629653667458522016-11-10T08:09:00.002+00:002016-11-10T08:09:53.079+00:00US ELECTION:THE ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATE WON
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Donald Trump’s election as the next
President of the United States of America came as no surprise to those who saw in
his support the same rejection of neo-liberal capitalism seen in the Brexit
result in June, in the election [and re-election] of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour
leader, in the unprecedented support for Bernie Sanders and in the growing support
for Marine LePen’s ‘Front National’ in France today.</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Trumps victory is part of this bigger
phenomenon. For all his incipient racism and
sexism Trump’s win represents above all the rejection of a ruthless economic
and political orthodoxy that is inherent in the five million jobs Barack Obama
has celebrated in the past 4 years all casual, low paid, insecure and
demeaning. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Trump was the anti-establishment
candidate. That is the great irony of his election. Even being abandoned by his
own Republican Party leadership helped his cause. But he won because he reached
beyond the Republican base in the South and Mid-West into the formerly
Democratic ‘blue collar rust belt’ strongholds of Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania
and West Virginia.</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Hilary Clinton on the other hand was
a truly dreadful candidate. Her popularity ratings were the worst in history
after Trumps. She however represents neo-liberal capitalism to the soles of her
feet. And the ‘political strategists’ who tried to present her as the candidate
of change failed miserably. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Trump alienated millions of
Americans but he won because he easily portrayed her as the utterly cynical and
crooked Washington insider. She is not a good role model for women anywhere.
She would have done nothing for working class women in America and never has. Voters
looking for equality and progressive advance for women and African Americans
and Latinos in America deserved better. Anti-establishment figures like Bernie
Sanders or Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who was the Left Democrat’s
preferred option, would have won. The Democratic Party’s polls all showed
Sanders had a far better chance of beating Trump than Clinton. But the ‘Super
Delegates’ were all in her pocket. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">THE POLLSTERS AND THE POLITICAL PUNDITS GOT
IT WRONG AGAIN</b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
The only people to challenge Hilary
Clinton for the title of ‘biggest loser’ in this election were the pollsters
and pundits. They all got this result badly wrong. I followed this election
closely and the British media establishment’s coverage was dire. The BBC and
Sky were particularly hopeless. I should have known from their woeful performance
in the Scottish Independence Referendum and the BREXIT vote. But they exhibited
bias against Trump when their job was to be objective. They made no effort to
explain his attraction to millions of Americans and sneeringly dismissed ‘non-college
educated, blue collar, working class, white, American men’. Lacking any empathy
with the concerns of this crucial ‘constituency’ who work three low
paid, insecure and soul destroying jobs they over played the importance of ‘identity politics’. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
Now, to cover their appalling ignorance
they talk, after the event, about how ‘shy Trump voters’ foxed them. Or could
it be that the BBC stuffed as it is with middle class public school boys/girls dressed
up as political experts are incapable of understanding working class people anywhere
or getting them to talk to them openly?</div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT WILL TRUMP BE?</b></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
The short answer is just like all
the others. He is not a fascist, he is a mere right-wing populist. Having veered to the right to win the
Republican nomination he moved back to the centre to win the ‘General
Election’. He will face the same US establishment he sought to challenge and he
will change little. The same military industrial complex, the same Wall Street,
the same ‘Washington’, the same Congress and the same vested interests he
rallied against will remain in control. He is not about to challenge the US
political or business elite. And he will certainly not deliver the promises he
made about good jobs, prosperity and security to those Americans who voted for
him.</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0px;">
The task of changing America for
the better, providing the jobs, security, prosperity, health and pursuit of
happiness the ordinary people all seek awaits the Left in the USA today. And whilst
Bernie Sanders’ campaign gave us hope as this election overall has again
demonstrated the Left in the USA is very weak and has an awful long way to go.</div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-6950790976585458212016-11-08T09:40:00.000+00:002016-11-08T09:40:02.152+00:00Edinburgh People's Festival hosts 2nd BURNS Night ON THE BEACH<h3 style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 40pt; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-size: x-large;">‘BURNS
ON THE BEACH’</span> </span></h3>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-weight: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-size: large;">Sunday 22nd January – Portobello beach @ 7pm</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">Yes
we know no one else has a ‘Burns Supper’ on the beach! But the People’s
Festival likes to ‘break the mould’. Others follow our lead.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">In
2015 our ‘Tram o’ Shanter’ flashmob on Edinburgh’s new transport system regaled
unsuspecting travellers with musical renditions of ‘Ae Fond Kiss’ and ‘A man’s
a man for a’ that’. Last year we hosted the world’s first ‘BURNS ON THE BEACH’
night. And it was such a huge success we immediately resolved to do it again. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">‘You’re
welcome Willie Stewart’ is our tribute to Robert Burns and his enduring message.
To those building a new life here in Scotland we offer a ‘guid welcome’ with a
seat by our camp fire, warm food, hot drinks, singing, laughing and dancing – to
celebrate the inimitable legacy Burns left us all.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 14pt; margin: 0px;">BURNS
ON THE BEACH 2 takes place Sunday 22<sup>nd</sup> January on Portobello beach [Bath
Street] 7pm-9pm. Come along and enjoy fabulous entertainment [including a piper],
warm food & hot drinks all gathered round a roaring fire amid stories,
songs and dancing to cheer ‘the world’s poet.’</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 20pt; margin: 0px;">‘BURNS
ON THE BEACH 2’ </span></b></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 20pt; margin: 0px;">Sunday 22nd
January 2017 : 7pm-9pm </span></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 20pt; margin: 0px;">Portobello beach
[at Bath Street].</span></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 20pt; margin: 0px;">FREE ENTRY<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>[Donations welcome]</span></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div align="center" style="margin: 0px; text-align: center;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Bookman Old Style",serif; font-size: 18pt; margin: 0px;"><a href="http://www.edinburghpeoplesfestival.org/"><span style="color: blue;">www.edinburghpeoplesfestival.org</span></a></span></b><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-size: 18pt; margin: 0px;"> </span></b></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-67271685917093043292016-10-24T20:45:00.001+01:002016-10-24T20:46:38.629+01:00SNP'S ADVOCACY OF NEO-LIBERALISM IMPEDES SUPPORT FOR INDEPENDENCE <span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;"><i>This article is published in the latest edition of the Scottish Socialist Voice</i> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">‘I can confirm today that the
Independence Referendum Bill will be published for consultation next week’
announced Nicola Sturgeon to a standing ovation from her Party Conference in
Glasgow. </span><br />
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">But wait! Isn’t this the same ‘Draft’
Bill she unveiled last month in her ‘legislative programme’ for Holyrood? And
isn’t it the Bill that is to be discussed for a year containing no specified date
for a second referendum? And isn’t that referendum merely ‘consultative’ lacking
the legal validity of the 2014 vote? And if passed isn’t the Bill to be stuck
in her handbag and used only if a majority for Independence magically
materialises? </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">What, many will ask, is the SNP doing
to advocate the case for Independence now and to effectively counter Unionist arguments.
For it has not done so for two years. Rather it puts its own party interests
ahead of the independence cause.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">Despite the nationalists winning two consecutive
General Elections in Scotland support for Independence has not grown. Indeed the
latest poll by BMG for The Herald [13/10/16] has it falling. In the aftermath
of the EU Referendum in June 59% said they’d back Independence. Now it is down
to 45%. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">‘Indyref2 before 2019 to keep
Scotland in the EU’ ran the newspaper headlines on her speech. But the BMG poll
also found 47% are against holding another Referendum with only 38% in favour. Three
quarters of those against the vote said BREXIT makes no difference. BMG
research director Dr Michael Turner concluded ‘The poll shows the EU is no game
changer’ confirming the SSP’s view that to win ‘INDYREF2’ the YES campaign must
convince on the issues affecting the day to day lives of Scotland’s working
class majority. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">The SNP has confused public anger over
‘the democratic deficit’ on June 23<sup>rd</sup> with a misplaced affection for
the anti-democratic neo-liberal EU in Brussels. More worryingly for a First
Minister with an outsized passion for the EU the evidence shows most Scots will
not vote for Independence simply to remain inside that bureaucracy! The passion
Nicola Sturgeon displays for the EU reveals above all her loyalty to Scotland’s
big business interests not ‘its people’. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">More and more voters are asking when
they see the SNP’s <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">motto in primus</i>
‘Standing up for Scotland’, what ‘Scotland’ do they mean? For, as the recently
published figures for multiple deprivation show, they are not ‘standing up’ for
Scotland’s working class communities.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">Nicola Sturgeon’s obsession with the
EU signifies first her party’s economic neo-liberal orthodoxy. And second reveals
the SNP’s Right-wing is far stronger than it’s Left-wing. She would do well to heed
the warnings from observers like Martin Jacques [‘The Observer’ 18/09/16] that the
economic and political dominance of neo-liberalism may be coming to an end. The
huge support for Sanders, Corbyn, Syriza and Podemos on the left and Trump, Le Pen
and Brexit on the right represent a popular backlash against neo-liberalism and
a desire for profound improvement in people’s living standards. Such ‘inchoate
expressions of resentment’ as Jacques puts it, are railed against the very economic
orthodoxy the SNP supports. Their economic policies widen inequalities, push
down real incomes for the masses, proscribes public ownership and compels the ‘marketization’
of public services with taxes on business and the rich discouraged.<span style="margin: 0px;"> </span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">The election of Angus Robertson MP as
SNP Deputy Leader came as no surprise. His victory will have cheered party chiefs
at Jackson’s Close for it endorses their orthodox neo-liberal economics. Known
as ‘Mr NATO’ by his critics and firmly on the Right of the party, Robertson saw
off two left wing challengers with ease in the ballot of 125,000 members. The
result tells us a great deal about the political balance of forces inside the nationalist
party. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">It is ironic that having won mass
popular support for not being Labour, for not being the party most closely
associated with neo-liberalism, the SNP is in the same ideological camp. They won
Parliamentary seats on the promise of ‘standing up’ to the excesses of
neo-liberalism. But they have not done so. They advocate rather than ‘attack’
this hegemonic doctrine of corporate capitalism and in doing so they jeopardise
the prospects of Independence. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0px;">Only by delivering the message of change
working class voters need can the SNP secure the second Independence vote. But
their passion for the neo-liberal EU and the outlandish claims they have made
on its nature, on their place in the BREXIT negotiations and on stopping Scotland’s
departure from it, exposes their real agenda. ‘Scotland’s business community’ has
the SNP in its pocket and, as Kenny McAskill has recently admitted, produced ‘timid
and managerial’ ambitions from the First Minister after two years in office.
Such criticism is entirely valid even if it comes from a former Minister who
did little to confront this ‘managerialism’ himself over the past 10 years.
Nonetheless he is right to conclude a majority cannot be won for Independence on
such a neo-liberal prospectus.</span></div>
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<br /></div>
<div style="line-height: 115%; margin: 0px 0px 11px;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<b></b><i></i><u></u><sub></sub><sup></sup><strike></strike>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-34565771339379544392016-09-25T10:21:00.001+01:002016-09-25T10:22:34.011+01:00GROUNDHOG DAY FOR LABOUR AS CORBYN WINS VOTE AGAIN AND MP'S IGNORE IT AGAINIt is hard to see what difference Jeremy Corbyn's re-election as Labour leader makes to the crisis his party is in. <br />
As expected he saw off the challenge of Owen Smith with ease. And as expected 200 of his MP's have told him they will ignore the result just as they did last year. Adding insult to injury for Corbyn his opponent Smith won 58% of the vote in Scotland. <br />
So the bloody stand-off continues. <br />
And yet for all the melodrama the $64m question remains unanswered, what does Labour actually stand for? Does it still believe we should keep Trident nuclear weapons? Does it still believe in neo-liberal economic orthodoxy when its time appears to be up even for the capitalists who employ it? Does it still oppose Scottish Independence? Does it still believe in austerity and support 80% of George Osborne's cuts? Does it still believe in military interventions in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan? Does it still support the monarchy and the House of Lords? Does it still support the privatisation of the NHS and other public services? Does it still oppose higher taxes on the rich?<br />
This confusion means Labour remain an utterly ineffective opposition at Westminster, Holyrood and everywhere else.<br />
It is clear Corbyn cannot heal the splits in his party. The differences are so politically profound and the bitterness now so personal. He may be a principled socialist but 80% of his MP's are not.<br />
So for all warm words of conciliation in the days that follow such results it will be back to 'business as usual' for the Labour MP's out to oust him within the week. Although they do not have the stomach to leave Labour as their forefathers in the SDP did in the early 1980's they will nonetheless continue to undermine him every chance they get. They will neither bury the hatchet nor buckle down to defend the interests of the working people who elected them. The Labour stasis will continue for some time yet.Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-72779352448277603652016-07-29T10:08:00.003+01:002016-07-29T10:08:56.802+01:00IS THE LABOUR PARTY ABOUT TO SPLIT?'Jeremy Corbyn's election as Labour leader is a symptom of the party's existential crisis not it's solution.' That was the conclusion I reached last summer following Corbyn's astonishing victory in the 2015 Labour leadership contest. The electorate's rejection of Ed Miliband's 'more of the same neo-liberalism' was followed by equally stark warning to Labour from its own members to change direction and outline clearly what it now stood for.<br />
<br />
In the year since that vote Labour's crisis has worsened markedly. The Parliamentary Labour Party simply ignored the outcome of the leadership vote. Morale amongst Labour members deteriorated with each Parliamentary rebellion against Corbyn. The infamous 'chicken coup' organised by members of his Shadow Cabinet was designed to force him to resign. Instead it stiffened his resolve. And it has now produced this unprecedented second contest between Corbyn and Owen Smith the agent of the PLP faction that so despise him.<br />
<br />
There is no shadow of doubt the contest will be poisonous nor that Corbyn will again emerge victorious. Some 600,000 Labour members are determined to deliver their verdict on the anti-democratic treachery of Smith, Angela Eagle and the rest of the PLP plotters.<br />
<br />
The entire episode highlights the fundamental division in the Labour Party which was again laid bare when Andrew Marr interviewed Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell last weekend. Labour, Marr pointed out, has always been divided between those who see capitalism as a powerful, unopposable force they seek to manage in Government and those who see it as an exploitative and at times barbarous system which must be replaced by socialism. Corbyn is of course the first Labour leader to emerge from the latter camp.<br />
<br />
In the 100 years of its existence Labour has never in truth resolved this core conflict. In recent years it has become politically, economically and socially neo-liberal. Neil Kinnock, John Smith, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Miliband all brought it to this place. Their policies were unashamedly capitalist, pro-market and 'business friendly'. They made it clear they saw Labour as a parliamentary party that sought the acceptance of the UK establishment. Corbyn on the other hand is an outsider contemptuous of the British ruling classes who seeks to end their undemocratic and ruthless grip on power. He seeks to replace capitalism with a more efficient, fairer and more democratic political and economic system.<br />
<br />
I agree with Jeremy Corbyn on many things, but not about Scottish independence. He does not see the progressive democratic case for self-determination. And he is also wrong in my view to foster illusions in Labour as a socialist party, even under his leadership. Nonetheless every democrat in Britain fervently hopes he wins again for those in the PLP faction who have stabbed him in the back so often and so publicly deserve to feel the wrath of party members. <br />
<br />
But many question arise should he win a second time; above all what exactly has changed? Are his enemies in the PLP and beyond going to bury the hatchet and accept the will of the membership this time? Or are they more likely to leave and form a new party? Labour MP's fear Theresa May is about to call another General Election and most fear they will lose their seats. And they would rather lose on their own terms than under Corbyn's leadership.<br />
<br />
There have, its true, been predictions of a Labour Party split many times over the years that came to nothing, but this time it seems unavoidable. If it does happen the implications for politics across these isles will be profound.<br />
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-89947383403388854712016-07-12T19:05:00.002+01:002016-07-12T19:05:18.367+01:00High Street Banking CrooksIt's official, there is one law for the banks and another for the rest of us. <br />
<br />
A US Congressional Report published today reveals that the Department of Justice dropped serious criminal charges against the world's biggest bank in 2013 after George Osborne intervened to warn the prosecution would lead to another 'global financial disaster'.<br />
<br />
Prosecutors were told that HSBC chiefs had laundered $881m from Mexican and Colombian drug cartels. Yet the bankers did not face the full force of the law because they were too big to prosecute. Instead of sending them to jail they allowed these banking crooks to pay a paltry $1.9bn fine because of the fear of 'systemic risk to the global financial market'. <br />
<br />
This episode tells us a great deal about the morality and greed that is rife in the world's biggest 'industry'. <br />
<br />
It shows there is virtually no crime the bankers can commit that will result in jail time for these 'masters of the universe'. And it exposes the impotence of apparently powerful politicians like US Attorney General Eric Holder and UK Chancellor George Osborne in the face of neo-liberal finance capitalism.<br />
<br />
Who can possibly doubt that 21st century capitalism is in the grip of amoral and crooked financiers? Who can doubt that these bankers act as if they are above the law? The plea bargained outcome in this case is hardly likely to act as a deterrent which will successfully curb their illegal behaviour.<br />
<br />
The fact is the bankers have the politicians in their pockets. And only after we change that reality can we expect to see crooked bankers brought to justice anywhere.<br />
<b></b><b></b>Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-81313499271779583552016-06-16T10:52:00.001+01:002016-06-16T10:52:24.556+01:00Off to the Spanish General Election - Sunday June 26thI am off to Madrid on Sunday to observe the Spanish General election at the invitation of Podemos.<br />
<br />
The election has been called because it is 6 months since the last election and the Spanish Constitution decrees a new vote must be held if no party/coalition has been able to command a majority in the Cortes within that period. Since the last election on December 20th resulted in a hung parliament and none of the 4 main parties could agree to govern separately or together the June 26th vote has been called.<br />
<br />
The latest opinion polls suggest little has changed however since December in terms of popular support. The conservative Partido Popular [PP] stands on 29% of the vote, Podemos [We Can] is on 25.5%, PSOE [the Labour Party] 20% and the smaller right of centre party Cuidadanos [Citizens] is on 14%. [Source: El Pais/Metroscopia 11.6.16]<br />
<br />
With no party again likely to emerge with enough support to form a majority in the 350 seat Cortes on its own the pressure will mount to form a coalition. The likelihood of that happening however is poor. All the possible permutations failed to materialise last time. So there is likely to be a prolonged political impasse.<br />
<br />
All of this is bad news for the economy and continues the journey into uncharted political waters for post Franco Spain. The country has been governed by either the PP or PSOE since the 1970's. But that all changed when the Spanish economy 'went off a cliff' following its financial collapse of 2008. The unprecedented economic crisis that followed also unearthed massive corruption and bribery at the heart of the Spanish banking sector and political establishment. The PP and PSOE leaders were caught red handed and thoroughly discredited by their financial corruption. <br />
<br />
The economic collapse and social outrage at the corruption scandals led to the emergence first of Podemos [We Can] on the Left and then Cuidadanos [Citizens] on the Right. Both changed the face of Spanish politics.<br />
<br />
Economically Spain remains in huge trouble. Unemployment as a whole is running at 20% and youth unemployment at 50%. The country has seen one million people emigrate in the last 5 years alone. The EU was forced to step in and bail out the Spanish finance sector. The country now has one of the highest debt: income ratio's in the world. It owes its creditors more than one Trillion Euros. The social consequences of the collapse are pitiful. 30% of the population are now living in poverty and unable for instance to afford the electricity they need to keep warm in the winter and cool in the blistering summer sun.<br />
<br />
Podemos and their pony-tailed leader Pablo Iglesias have promised to create a million new jobs, to renegotiate EU debt repayments, invest in health and education provision and industrialise Spain's economy by moving away from the traditional sectors of tourism, agriculture and construction. Their hopes of forming Spain's first Left-wing Coalition Government since the 1930's rest with PSOE leader Pedro Sanchez. But there is no love lost between the two parties. More importantly their political differences are profound. Podemos are anti-austerity. PSOE are much more economically and socially conservative. On the crucial issue of Spain's constitution where areas like Catalonia, the Basque country, the Valencien community and Galicia the two party's share a desire to maintain the unitary state. But Podemos is in favour of independence referenda in these areas with a new constitutional settlement might loosen the grip of Madrid and devolve even more power to the localities.<br />
<br />
In an attempt to boost its own level of support, increase the pressure on PSOE and ultimately break the deadlock in government Podemos has reached an agreement with the Spanish Communist Party [Unida Izquerida] to form an alliance for this election and will appear on the ballot paper as Unidos Podemos [United We Can].<br />
<br />
I am looking forward to the election campaign and learning much more about Podemos's programme and strategy in the next week or so. And I will be filing regular reports from Madrid here on my blog over the next ten days.<br />
<br />
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-45095424603243773292016-06-05T20:34:00.001+01:002016-06-05T20:34:03.140+01:00Edinburgh Peoples Festival hosts debate on the European Union Referendum<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-N2sxmgB9CVc/V1R89pV8T-I/AAAAAAAABRg/yGKAgkz1IMIBY_jbPNZCNFY8pp-Y5t38ACLcB/s1600/EPF.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-N2sxmgB9CVc/V1R89pV8T-I/AAAAAAAABRg/yGKAgkz1IMIBY_jbPNZCNFY8pp-Y5t38ACLcB/s400/EPF.jpg" width="282" /></a></div>
<div>
The Edinburgh People's Festival hosts a debate on the forthcoming Referendum on Britain's membership of the EU on Wednesday at The Grassmarket Centre in Candlemaker Row.</div>
<div>
The event offers the citizens of Edinburgh help to decide whether to Remain or Leave the EU.</div>
<div>
Former SNP Deputy leader Jim Sillars will make the case for leaving the EU, Maggie Chapman from the Scottish Greens will outline the Remain view and Lothians MSP Neil Findlay will also join us to explain why he is as yet still undecided.</div>
<div>
Doors open at 7pm and the debate will be chaired by Natalie Reid from the Edinburgh People's Festival. </div>
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-33568342112555077652016-03-11T09:19:00.002+00:002016-03-11T09:19:06.790+00:00FREE PRESCRIPTIONS MUST BE PROTECTED<b><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">
</span></b><br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">Free
NHS prescriptions are one of the landmark achievements of The Scottish Parliament. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">And this needs to be reiterated </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">as the Annual Conference of the British Medical
Association's Scottish Committee convenes in Clydebank today. For a</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">
motion has been tabled at the conference by the Ayrshire and Arran branch calling for the reintroduction of
means tested NHS prescription charges on the grounds that providing these medicines
free is 'a drain on NHS resources and adds to GP's workloads'.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">
As an MSP I presented the original Holyrood Members Bill to abolish these
charges in Scotland. And I am proud to have done so. The charges were abolished in Scotland in 2011. Any move to reintroduce the charges would not be in the best
interests of patients or our nations health.</span></div>
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;"></span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">NHS
Prescription charges were introduced in 1951. The charge of 1/- [one shilling] was
intended to be temporary to help pay for Britain's war in Korea. Sixty years
later they were finally abolished in Scotland but only after the charge had
risen to £6.50 per item on the prescription.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">The
evidence I presented to Parliament in 2004 showed that tens of
thousands of patients were going without the medicines they needed because they could not afford to pay. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">The
means testing principles were illogical and contradictory. Some patients
were exempt from payment on the grounds of age. Others, such as pregnant
mums, were exempt on the basis of their particular health condition. There was no logic to which
conditions should be exempt and others charged. It was entirely arbitrary based
on the cost implications to the Exchequer. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">This meant
that a retired multi-millionaire for example did not have to pay a penny but a
low paid care worker had to meet the cost in full. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">MSPs
on £65,000 a year were often exempt by virtue of their age or
an existing health condition but cancer patients requiring multiple drugs at one time could
rack up a small fortunes in medical bills.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">The
founding principle of the NHS, that the service be available to all citizens
free at the point of need and paid for out of general taxes was of course
completely breached by prescription charges.</span></div>
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">Wales
and Northern Ireland had abolished the charges years before Holyrood finally
did so in 2011. Today only NHS patients in England now pay for their
prescriptions. The charge currently stands at £8.20 per item. And it is due to
rise again on April 1st.</span><br />
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">Prescription
charges mean the sick must pay twice for medical treatment, once out of their
general taxes and secondly from this additional 'tax on the sick'. E</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">conomically
the case for reintroducing prescription charges is weakest of all. </span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">NHS
Scotland gave evidence to support my Bill showing that the cost of admitting
patients to hospital whose condition had deteriorated through not accessing
medication [£600/day] far exceeded any income they might gather from
prescription charges. Leaving aside the cost to the wider economy - of days
lost to prolonged sickness absence from work - the cost to the NHS of
</span><span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">administering the means-tested system and protecting it from fraud
reduced again any financial advantage further. The cost of medicines prescribed by GP's to their patients represents less than 0.5% [half of one per cent] of NHS Scotland's annual budget. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">NHS
prescription charges are profoundly and politically unpopular because they
undermine the fundamental principle of an NHS free to all.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="background: white; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="color: black; font-size: 12.0pt;">
I am sure the BMA in Scotland will recognise the powerful case for ensuring patients in Scotland do not go without the medicines they need and oppose the motion to reintroduce prescription charges. And I urge them to work with their colleagues in England to see the charges are abolished there too.</span></div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-83448651918220645072016-02-06T20:03:00.000+00:002016-02-06T20:03:01.122+00:00RISE is the socialist choice on May 5thIndependence is the elephant in the room as far as the 2016 Holyrood elections are concerned. It completely overshadows everything else.<br />
RISE: Scotland's Left Alliance supports a second referendum on Independence within the lifetime of the next Holyrood Parliament. We want an independent socialist Scotland, a modern democratic republic.<br />
Scotland was assured throughout the 2014 Referendum by the 'No' side that we would never have to endure another Tory Government we did not elect or suffer policies we did not want. But that turned out not to be true. Instead another Tory Government was foisted upon us to inflict painful cuts and punishing austerity on working people in Scotland. They preside over an economy increasingly built on poverty wages and casualization. They continue to blame immigrants and claimants for an economic crisis that had nothing to do with them. Whereas they let the real culprits the greedy, reckless and corrupt bankers carry on with 'business as usual'. They have taken us into yet another war in the Middle East, this time in Syria, that we do not support. And they plan to restrict workers rights still further by introducing the worst anti-union laws in all Europe. It is little wonder then that this hatred for the Tories is the predominant influence in Scottish politics today.<br />
<br />
RISE is in favour of a second referendum on Independence within the lifetime of the next Parliament to rid us of this Tory menace. But the independence movement needs to be clear that a new mandate is required from the Scottish people if we are to force Westminster to concede another vote. We must not forget that the power to hold a legally binding referendum on independence still resides with Westminster! And they got such a scare in 2014 they will not, to put it mildly, willingly grant another one. They are determined to stop Scotland breaking free from British control. So we need to mobilise Scottish public opinion behind that second referendum otherwise we could see majority support for independence develop and yet be unable to seize it.<br />
<br />
RISE are standing candidates in the Holyrood elections on the eight regional lists in favour of a second referendum within the lifetime of the next Parliament at a time of our choosing. And we are asking people for their second vote. <br />
<br />
Working class people need socialists in the Parliament speaking up for them. RISE has an excellent chance of getting MSP's elected and we urge all independence supporters to vote for us with their second vote and help elect as many RISE MSP's as possible on the lists. RISE has put our promise of a second referendum at the centre of our manifesto pledges. And as part of our vision of an independent socialist Scotland we also support a £10/hour living wage, the replacement of the Council tax with an income based alternative that sees the rich pay more and poorer less, and a promise to build 100,000 much needed new homes for rent in the socially owned sector. We will also create 100,000 new climate jobs in renewable energy, sustainable farming and via free public transport provision. And last but by no means least all RISE MSP's will live on the average wage of the Scottish people - just as the SSP's MSP's did between 1999 and 2007. So instead of taking the £60,000 salary all other MSP's get ours will live like the majority and not the elite.<br />
As Edinburgh's famous socialist son James Connolly said in 1910 'RISE with your class not out of it.'<br />
<br />
And all this shows that voting for RISE on May 5th is the smart choice for working people. <br />
<br />Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-39140279628915111442015-12-22T21:06:00.005+00:002015-12-22T21:06:48.063+00:00Spain set for period of political instability following Sunday's General Election
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: left;">
Having begun 2015 with a visit to Athens for the Greek General Election triumph of Syriza I had hoped to end the year by accepting an invitation from Podemos to witness Sunday’s General Election in Spain. Alas the votes close proximity to Christmas meant that for family reasons that was not possible.</div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; text-align: left;">
But the dramatic news from Madrid meant that for the first time in the post Franco era Spain will not be governed
outright by either the Popular Party [Tories] or PSOE [Labour]. The remarkable breakthrough by
Podemos [‘We can’] on the left and to a lesser extent by Cuidadanos [‘Citizens’] on the right was
widely predicted amid Spain’s prolonged economic collapse and recent high
profile corruption scandals. Spain now has a complex and polarised four party system with the PP on 123
seats in Parliament [down 66], PSOE on 90 [down 20], Podemos 69, Cuidadanos 40 and the others on 28.
</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
The result overall was inconclusive
however and even if the right-wing bloc manages to pull together a workable
coalition [by no means certain] they only just make it across the
176 seat threshold needed in the 350 seat Parliament. Similarly if the left
[PSOE + Podemos + the nationalist parties] can construct an agreed programme
[again a major doubt] they too only just make a majority. Talk of a ‘Grand Coalition’ between
the PP and PSOE, the two biggest parties, is equally unlikely. If no coalition
or minority Government can be cobbled together another election must be held
within three months. Many Spanish commentators believe this may be inevitable. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
The political uncertainty matches
the economic picture. The ‘recovery’ claimed by [former] Prime Minister Mariano
Rajoy is extremely weak and largely invisible to millions of poor and
under-employed Spaniards. For them Sunday’s result represents more of the same.
The same austerity, the same mass unemployment, the same mass emigration by the
cream of Spanish youth.</div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
And the unresolved national
questions in Catalonia, the Basque country and in Galicia, are unlikely to be
settled any time soon either. The views of PSOE and Podemos on the left for
example, are at odds with the desire of nationalists in the ‘regions’. Neither
party backs self-determination, although Podemos was forced to concede a
binding referendum to Catalonia in return for support there. The right wing
parties oppose outright independence for Spanish ‘regions’.</div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
Even if any coalition Government
can be patched together it will be vulnerable to
Parliamentary defeats. The PP lost one third of its seats. PSOE who should have
been the main beneficiary of widespread disgust with the PP Government lost a
fifth of theirs. </div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
Podemos won 69 seats in a
spectacular General Election debut for this new, young party. However a note of caution may be wise as there are many
questions now facing them. Given they led the polls in the Spring uppermost
perhaps among the questions is why did Spanish voters not move more decisively
left? And why did 80% of voters reject Podemos given the severe economic hardship
and the blazing indignation at several high profile corruption scandals
affecting both the PP and PSOE?</div>
<br />
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
Might a more decisive rejection
of Spain’s political duopoly not have been expected? And might it not be
premature therefore to write off Spain’s two long established parties just yet
with all their money, power and influence? </div>
<div style="line-height: 150%; margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
In January Podemos were ahead in
the polls. They were then rocked by a financial scandal of
their own. Then there were reports of internal schisms over the party's structures and its decision-making process amid accusations
of a move to the right. Podemos will face intense media
scrutiny now and immense political pressure from a Spanish state concerned at its
rise. All of which will undoubtedly add to the wider political instability in Spanish
society. </div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<br /></div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-18761740841319768632015-11-30T19:08:00.001+00:002015-11-30T19:08:02.555+00:00Britain is Sleepwalking into a Nightmare in Syria<div style="text-align: center;">
<i>This is a letter I sent to 'The Herald' today following an article by their columnist David Torrance on the prospect of UK air strikes on ISIL in Syria</i></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: Calibri, 'Segoe UI', Meiryo, 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.72px;">
David Torrance is correct to highlight the glaring flaws in David Cameron's case for UK air strikes in Syria ‘ …the intellectual side of the balance sheet seems to me insubstantial’ in today's Herald [‘Corbyn’s style may be inept, but his argument is correct’ 30/11/15].</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: Calibri, 'Segoe UI', Meiryo, 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.72px;">
The Prime Minister’s plea that ‘we need to do something’ after the Paris massacre is not god enough. In fact it is no better than the case Parliament rejected two years ago. On that occasion David Cameron insisted we should bomb the Assad Government after it used chemical weapons against civilians in the escalating civil war. Had MPs taken his advice ISIL would be sitting in Damascus today running the country and the political consequences of that don’t bear thinking about.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: Calibri, 'Segoe UI', Meiryo, 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.72px;">
The British Governments claim that ‘there are 70,000 moderate fighters in the Free Syrian Army’ ready and waiting to play the crucial role of ‘ground forces’ in the war against ISIL is nonsense. It ranks alongside Tony Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier’ which insisted Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction in Iraq in 2003. Robert Fisk, the widely respected Middle East correspondent, ridicules Cameron's suggestion and insists the FSA is lucky if it has 100 ‘moderate Sunni soldiers’ and points out that this largely fictional ‘army’ is referred to only by Western leaders who refuse to recognise that the only forces [beyond the Kurds in their northern enclaves] capable of defeating ISIL are the Syrian Army of Bashir al-Asaad backed as he is by the Russians, Iran and Hezbollah.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div data-signatureblock="true" style="background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: Calibri, 'Segoe UI', Meiryo, 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 22.72px; text-align: start;">
</div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #444444; font-family: Calibri, 'Segoe UI', Meiryo, 'Microsoft YaHei UI', 'Microsoft JhengHei UI', 'Malgun Gothic', sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 22.72px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 1; word-spacing: 0px;">
David Cameron’s proposition to launch immediate UK air strikes on ISIL also undermines his oft repeated and equally reprehensible objective which is oust Assad and organise a complete ‘regime change’ in Syria. There is a brutal civil war taking place in Syria where the only force capable of defeating ISIL is the Syrian army.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<i><br /></i></div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-48211504253260811632015-11-25T19:25:00.000+00:002015-11-25T19:25:38.577+00:00Osborne's Autumn Statement reveals tax credit climbdown and extent of Tory attack on public spending Two features of George Osborne's Autumn Statement today overshadow all others. The 'headline grabber' will inevitably be his unexpected climb down over tax credits. Just as important however are the figures revealing the reduction in state spending during his period in office. It now accounts for just 35% of the total UK economy. It was 50% when he became Chancellor in 2010.<br />
<br />
Faced with widespread opposition over his proposal to cut £4.4 billion from the benefits paid to top up the wages of low paid workers, including criticism from scores of his own backbenchers, this aspirant Prime Minister abandoned his plan altogether. His decision says more about his own political ambitions however than any change of heart by the Tories. They still intend to slash £12 billion from other welfare provisions most noticeably Universal Credits and housing benefit. They will also proceed as planned with £20 billion of cuts to transport services, climate change provisions and justice budgets.<br />
<br />
Over the last 5 years the Tories have systematically slashed UK state spending. They are committed as George Osborne again made clear today 'to a high wage [sic], low tax and low state spending economy'. This means passing more and more responsibility for providing social services will be passed to the private sector. And more of the real wage bill will be passed on to private employers and not the state.<br />
<br />
So how can Osborne reconcile his u-turn on tax credits with his commitment to lowering the national debt? The Office of Budget Responsibility can provide some of the answer. He has benefited from low interest rates for paying back government debt says the OBR and higher than expected tax returns in the year ahead. But the OBR has also concluded that his borrowing will go up not down from now until 2020. So Osborne's decisions today were as much about his own political ambitions as economic 'prudence'<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-37449128687542858552015-10-27T10:06:00.002+00:002015-10-27T10:06:39.478+00:00<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<h1 style="border: none; mso-padding-alt: 0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm;">
THE UNACCOUNTABLE IN
PURSUIT OF THE INDEFENSIBLE<o:p></o:p></h1>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whilst the defeat the Government suffered last night on
working families tax credits was welcome it should not be seen as justification for the House of Lords itself. I watched some of the debate
intermittently throughout the day and apart from the issue itself and the fact the event was televised the scene could easily have been mistaken for the 17<sup>th</sup>
century. The 600 unelected and unaccountable Lords, Ladies, Earls, Viscounts,
Baronesses, Dames and Bishops looked utterly ridiculous in their ermine robes and
ancient setting. Their pomposity and self-importance merely reiterated just
how unrepresentative they all are of the British people as a whole.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
These hand picked lackeys collected up from across the UK
establishment to be rewarded are not typical of the population as whole. Neither is the House of Commons of course but The Lords is made up entirely
of failed and former politicians, retired academics, retired professionals from
medicine, the law, the arts, science, administration, the police and armed
services, captains of industry, trade unions barons and the civil service. And last but by no means least ludicrous are the church lackeys; the bishops,
cardinals, rabbi’s, etc.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There they all sit on their £300/day plus first
class expenses. These are the last people I would want considering the precarious
circumstances of the poorest in our society.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
For the debate again put into sharp focus what is wrong with ‘British
democracy’. On the one hand an elected Tory Government was attacking the income of
the poor without a mandate to do so – Cameron repeatedly said throughout
the election he ‘had no plans to cut tax credits’ - and on the other hand Lords
and Ladies of privilege who, for all their formal education, revealed they simply haven’t a
clue about what life is really like for working people in 21st century Britain being paid ‘peanuts’ on zero hour contracts.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;">
<b>Patronising
patronage.<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The House of Lords is of course an affront to democracy and
should be abolished forthwith. Labour, the Lib-Dems, and the Tories want to
keep it to use as patronage and to reward their own 'lickspittles'. They insist unconvincingly that it plays a learned role in scrutinising Government legislation
made up as it is with ‘brilliant minds' and 'experts from across various fields’.
This is of course nonsense. There is no obligation on Lords to even turn up for debates and many peers were born into the seat handed to
them by their fathers and grandfathers etc. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Why the Greens and Plaid Cywru take seats in the Lords I
have no idea. It reflects poorly on them both and rather undermines their democratic credentials. The SNP does not take up seats in the Lords.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>What is to be done? </b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The answer is to scrap the House of Lords altogether or
replace it with an elected second chamber. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Advocates of a second chamber suggest it plays a scrutinising
role on legislation considered by the main chamber but they accept it should be of secondary importance to the main elected body both in its
political importance and its legislative reach.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The US for example has a bicameral system - two elected
chambers - The House of Representative and The Senate. The former has members
directly elected with the number of seats awarded to each state based on
population size. The latter is also directly elected but Senators are limited
to 2 per state regardless of population size. Whilst the issues discussed in
each chamber differ key Bills need the backing of both legislatures. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-20152374427320689082015-09-20T21:15:00.000+01:002015-09-20T21:15:05.336+01:00SCOTLANDS SOCIALIST PARTY<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KJmHbtPhOoo/Vf8Sul0-_UI/AAAAAAAABRU/6mYFFWYkAK8/s1600/12009552_10207642784047120_6653616023097176686_n.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="300" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KJmHbtPhOoo/Vf8Sul0-_UI/AAAAAAAABRU/6mYFFWYkAK8/s400/12009552_10207642784047120_6653616023097176686_n.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Scottish Socialist Party Executive Committee members unveil fresh new banner at meeting in Glasgow yesterday </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5853419062290032192.post-22062211675061490342015-09-20T21:07:00.000+01:002015-09-20T21:07:21.393+01:00'CORBYNMANIA' AND 'NICOLAMANIA'
‘Jeremy Corbyn is a thoroughly decent man. Everyone who has met him would describe him this way’ said the former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis interviewed on Channel Four News this week. Asked if he saw any similarities between the new Labour leader’s election and Syriza’s victory in the Greek General Election in January he said he saw the same elation but warned ‘this exuberance has to be channelled into a strong political defence in the face of an establishment onslaught.’
There are important warnings for Corbyn in Syriza’s subsequent u-turn politically too in the way Alexis Tsipras gave up confronting international capitalism and ended up managing it in Greece. Syriza, like Labour, is a coalition where the socialist left is very weak.
Whilst Jeremy Corbyns’ victory was cheered across Scotland, not least for the ‘drubbing’ he handed out to his Blairite opponents, it was achieved with little support from within the Scottish Labour Party. Scotland’s sole Labour MP Ian Murray did not vote for him. Neither did Scottish leader Kesia Dugdale or most of the constituency parties here. And the weakness of his ‘Campaign for Socialism’ group in the party was again demonstrated when he had to staff his Shadow Cabinet with MP’s who do not support him politically. He has very few allies in the Parliamentary Labour Party as was again demonstrated by the cool reception he received at his first meeting as leader. This does not augur well for Corbyn’s leadership. So despite the overwhelming scale of his victory the fact is he faces huge opposition within his party. And it remains to be seen how many of those who spent £3 to vote for him will join the Party to help strengthen his position in the teeth of considerable enmity from the party machine that do not want him there.
Reports suggest he and his deputy Tom Watson intend to spend one day a month in Scotland to 'rebuild Labour’s support'. He will have his work cut out for him. Since he does not support self-determination for Scotland he is not in touch with progressive opinion here far less the pro-independence left looking for a political home. In trying to reposition his party to the left of the SNP [as he must] he faces widespread disdain for Labour and wide illusions in Nicola Sturgeon. And as if to illustrate how ridiculously irrational those illusions have become a mural unveiled this week at the Edinburgh South Yes Café depicted the diminutive First Minister as Che Guevara - together with black beret and a yellow SNP logo!
Fortunately not everyone in Scotland has taken such leave of their senses. The Scottish Socialist Party realises the challenges Corbynmania an Nicolamania pose but we also recognise that support for the SNP will not remain at this level as the contradictions within its neo-liberal economic programme and social democratic rhetoric are exposed. That’s why we were instrumental in launching ‘Rise: Scotland’s Left Alliance’ last month to present a more effective alternative to Labour and the SNP.
RISE is the most important left unity project in Scotland since the launch of the SSP’s predecessor the Scottish Socialist Alliance twenty years ago. Local branches or circles are now being established throughout Scotland. RISE [Respect, Independence, Socialism and Environmental Justice] aims to win seats in next years Holyrood elections and present a bold socialist programme favouring a second referendum.
This issue features prominently in Jim Sillars’ new book ‘In Place of Failure’ [reviewed elsewhere in this newspaper]. The former MP and Deputy Leader of the SNP makes the case for a second referendum, a new electoral mandate in 2016 and for a ‘floating date’ chosen when the polls clearly indicate victory is likely. With the anniversary of the 2014 Referendum falling this week many seem to think victory in a second vote is a foregone conclusion. They are mistaken. The Independence movement cannot afford such complacency because the lessons of last year’s defeat have not yet been learned as Jim Sillars book makes clear. Moreover David Cameron only agreed to the last Referendum because he was confident he would win [as indeed he did], he will not be so amenable next time if the polls show Independence is supported by a majority. The political stalemate in Catalonia illustrates the case. The Spanish Government refuses to allow the Catalans an independence referendum because it knows it would lose.
Building a mass movement for an independent socialist Scotland remains the key task for the left. And the first part of that challenge involves winning seats at Holyrood next year.
Colinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01377753530652422438noreply@blogger.com0