Red Pepper on 'How red are the Greens?'

The latest Red Pepper, delivered today, has How red are the Greens? as its cover story with additional articles inside. It is edited by Michael Calderbank who is a member of the LRC and a local Brent activist with whom I have campaigned on various local issues.

The cover story by Andrew Dolan is fairly friendly and attributes a drop in Labour support on the left and the support of the young  'in part a consequence of the Green Party's opposition to the austerity politics that Labour has committed itself to. The Green's policies of rail nationalisation, social housing construction, a rise in the minimum wage and free education represent an attractive alternative to a demographic traditionally located on the left and more likely to express dissatisfaction with neoliberalism and austerity than those already entrenched within labour and property markets.'

However he quotes research by James Dennison that on specific economic policy issues those planning on voting Green in fact tend to be less left wing that Labour voters. 'What clearly separates likely Green voters from those of other parties, UKIP aside, is that a far higher proportion express a lack of trust in MPs in particular and UK democracy in general.'

He goes on, 'Accompanying the Green's leftward policy shift has been a new rhetoric comparable to that deployed across Europe. Talk of "the people" , of "us versus them" and even of "revolt" is now commonplace In Green Party publications and speeches and carries some legitimacy when considered in relation to the party's well-publicised support for various grassroots struggles and the involvement of the Scottish Greens in the Radical Independence Campaign'.'

After examining the prospects of the Greens winning more seats and holding on to Brighton Pavilion (according to him not terribly good) he says on tactical voting 'A newly emboldened Green party has little interest in such tactical anti-Tory consideration. Rather its eyes are fixed on the opportunities that may arise should '"politics as usual" and the austerity it entails continue. The party's recent talks with thee SNP and Plaid Cymru, and their stated intention to "unite wherever possible to battle the Westminster parties' "obsession with austerity", hint at the possibility of a changed political landscape: one in which the idea of the "other parties" including the Green Party, transforming growing popularity into power is more than just a pipedream.'

Joseph Healy, billed as a founder member of Green Left and ex GP International committee, writes a pessimistic article suggesting that the Greens chances of not disappointing their supporters if the get into any government are 'not good' based on what happened in Ireland, Czech Republic and France.

Hilary Wainwright in Out of their seats writes 'Caroline Lucas is perhaps currently the one (MP) able to speak most openly and clearly about what is on voters' minds: austerity and is daily consequences, and what is needed is parliamentary terms to end it.'  Quoting Lucas saying that a progressive alliance could do more in the next parliament Wainright goes on: 'Although the 'we' might in parliamentary voting terms be only one MP, in Lucas the Greens have had a real political force in parliament - a force driven not only by her personal capacities, which are immense' but also by a political methodology that could well be adopted by the progressive alliance as a whole. Lucas's effective parliamentary initiatives against fracking and the energy companies, for public ownership of the rail system and for reinstating the NHS have been the result of immersion in extra-parliamentary campaigns and public debates..A bit like Tony Benn, she thereby giver further confidence and strength to the movements in society and their ability to shift public consciousness with a clear and persuasive political message.'

Reviewing Caroline Lucas's recently Published Honourable Friends? Parliament and the Fight for Change, Ian Sinclair having praised the book as 'an absolute joy to read - accessible, fast paced and entertaining - and often funny too'  concludes..'Cogent, rational and humane Honourable Friends? confirms why it is essential all progressives work to make sure Lucas continues as an MP.

How the hell did they get away with it? Michael Rosen explains

I thought this Facebook post by Michael Rosen would be of interest to readers:

How the hell did they get away with it?

Call me naive or stupid but when the financial crash came I will admit here and now that I thought that because, for the first time in my lifetime, that 

a) the workings of capitalism had been laid bare in a way that they had never been before,
b) as people found that their standard of living was being cut and c) as people found that their hard-won and precious public services and welfare was being cut too, people would be outraged in ways that we had never seen before.

I confess I imagined that people would perhaps occupy their places of work, or their public services institutions - hospitals, schools, social services offices in order to defend them. I imagined that people across public and private industries would find that they had common interests in defending their standard of living. After all, I reasoned, as never before, the nakedness of capital (finance) screwing up all on its own, with no excuses that they had been driven into a corner by 'high wage demands' or 'trade unions holding them to ransom' and the like, would make it clear to us all that there is a difference between money and wealth - money being the stuff that rich people play with in order to keep themselves rich and wealth being the stuff that we need and make to keep ourselves safe and warm and productive.

But how wrong could I have been? And why or how has it turned out that I was so wrong?

1. It has been possible for very powerful people - politicians and news media - to repeat over and over again that the 'mess' or the 'crisis' was caused by one political party which happened to be in power at the time of the most severe point in that crisis - namely the Labour Party of GB, even though the crash was (and still is) global and was caused by financiers taking risks that were…er…too risky.

2. It has been possible to keep the illusion going that the 'remedies' put in place to put things back together, are fair and just - even though they are nothing but a simple system of redistributing wealth from the poor to the rich. The richest 1000 people increased their wealth last year by over £40 billion while the poorest have seen their income (or standard of living) cut. The proportion of money earned by waged people in relation to money acquired by owners of capital has shifted and is shifting in favour of capital.

3. Interventions like £350 billion of quantitative easing ('printing money') have enriched the rich with hardly a murmur from those with the megaphones whose social duty was to tell us about it.

4. A constant burble over the last five years about the 'deficit' and 'balancing the books' and 'paying our way' has been like a mass education force telling us that
a) the deficit must be reduced or we will all go to hell in a handcart
b) the people in power are dramatically reducing it and this is improving our lives
c) we must re-elect them so that they can go on doing what they've been doing to reduce it further.

It has made very little difference that some people to repeat that a deficit can be productive in any economic system if it is used to invest in producing things we need, that demolishing public services has had a double effect of harming thousands of people's lives whilst handing over what remains of the services to subsidiaries of the super-rich.

It has made very little difference that some people have pointed out that the deficit is at levels we were told at the outset were unsustainable or impossible.

It has made very little difference that some people have pointed out that low income (engineered by the government) has two results:
a) people don't earn enough to pay enough taxes to lower the deficit and
b) people will borrow money to supplement their income…which is part of why the whole thing unravelled last time.

5. The 'economy' will recover.

The nineteenth century bearded chap pointed out that in a recession prices will eventually fall to a level at which the people who own and control capital will think once again that it's a good time to invest and produce and distribute. In the meantime, their cycle of boom and bust involves making the lives of the mass of people worse. This period of worsening standards of living can never be given back. They happen, they endure. The damage is done to people's minds and bodies and to the ways in which we hang together. Rich people - even the few who take a small hit in a recession - don't experience this. They have a bit less than a lot. The poor have less than very little. Even though people know this and feel this, it is possible to keep them from despair and anger by constantly suggesting that

a) it would be even worse if you let back in those terrible people who 'caused it' last time,
b) it's going to be better for you next year…er…when we cut £12 billion from services that you need and rely on…(not!)

6. Another useful way to distract people from the core fact that money is being transferred from the poor to the rich in the name of 'balancing the books' is to encourage or allow a story to be told over and over again about 'immigrants'. The truth of the matter is that the great cycles of boom and bust are not caused by a few hundred thousand people swapping countries. More often than not, it's a symptom and not a cause. If politicians were honest, helpful people they would spend a great deal of time explaining to us the benefits and drawbacks of the system they believe in - capitalism.

They love gassing on about all the benefits of innovation, competition and the like but hardly ever explain what 'bust' is all about. An honest advocate of capitalism might spend time explaining to us that, yes, it's a system that does demand that at times the poorest have to be poorer so that capitalists can go on making profits, because that's how the system works. Hello, they would say, we compete with each other, we try to cut costs, even as we have to invest loads of dosh in order to stay modern.

But no, instead, they allow or encourage all sorts of half-truths and lies to circulate in order to 'explain' why times are tough for millions of people. So, in one bust you'll see the bust explained by the fact that the workers have all been greedy and lazy, their pay too high, their holidays too long, their pensions too big. Another time, this story will be modified by saying that the hospitals, schools, social services cost too much. And another time the story is that the problem is what's going on abroad somewhere so the only solution is to go and bomb and kill hundreds of thousands of 'foreigners'. And another time, it's because 'we' are being 'swamped' by 'foreigners'.

These are all very potent lies to cover up for the fact that what makes people poor is employers paying working people less. And if they were honest, they would say that, yes, that IS what they do, and it's what they need to do in order for them to stay rich (i.e. make profits). But they don't.

7. So, in some ways, a time of reflection. As I write this, I suppose there is every chance that the Tories will win a few more seats than Labour. This may well mean that there will be another coalition - though it might be one that does not have a full majority. This means that there are certain kinds of legislation that could be defeated by the rest - unless Labour do that classic thing of saying that they are being 'statesmanlike' and supporting legislation which they don't agree with and which damage the majority of the people's standards of living. This will happen if, in the case of a Labour defeat, Miliband is replaced by someone from the Blairite rump.

Majority of responding candidates condemn illegal Israeli settlements

From the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. The views of Brent Central, Brent North and Hampstead and Kilburn candidates can be found HERE and will be updated when more responses are received. The Palestine issue along with other topics relating to conflicts will be discussed at a hustiongs on Monday April 13th at the Pakistan Centre, Marley Walk, Station Road at 7.30pm on Monday April 13th. DETAILS

General Election candidates who responded to an email survey co-ordinated by Palestine Solidarity Campaign have overwhelmingly condemned Israeli settlements as illegal under international law.

The vast majority also said they agreed that the next UK government should uphold the principles of equality, human rights and international law in all its relations and dealings with Israel.

Declared candidates in England, Wales and Scotland were sent more than 30,000 emails, using a PSC e-tool, by supporters of justice for Palestinians. The emails asked a series of questions designed to ascertain each candidate’s stance on Palestine and Israel.

The views of nearly 600 candidates were obtained and have now been made available on PSC’s website.

The candidates were asked: Do you consider the construction of Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal and unjustifiable?

Of the 470 candidates who responded to this question, 93% said yes. Many expanded on their answer, and, across all parties, were unequivocal in their condemnation of Israel’s settlements.

Candidates were also asked: Do you urge the UK government to uphold the principles of equality, human rights and international law in all its relations and dealings with Israel?

Of the 377 candidates who replied to this question, 97% said yes.

Sarah Colborne, Director of PSC, said:

These figures show clear support among Parliamentary candidates for international law to be applied to Israel, especially over its continued settlement building in the West Bank and Jerusalem. The settlements have been unequivocally condemned by the majority of candidates polled as illegal and unjustifiable.

We would like to see these candidates, if elected, carry this support into Parliament and translate their words into positive action that will see the end of Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, and justice, freedom and self-determination for the Palestinian people.

UK voters can find out where their candidates stand on the issue of justice for Palestinians by going to the ‘Candidates’ Views’ section on PSC’s website and entering their postcode. New candidates are being added regularly, as more responses are received.

Election hustings and meetings in Brent in the next fortnight

Hampstead and Kilburn is well ahead in terms of General Election hustings.  If any organisation has details of hustings in Brent Central and Brent North please send them in. Party allegiances aside I think it is important to have as much open and spirited debate as possible ahead of the General Election.

Here are some of the very different hustings happening in the next two weeks. If you know of more or are organising one and want it publicised please send me a jpeg, png or tiff file. I will add them to this posting.

Tjere will be an opportunity to register to vote at the Harlesden Hustings for those withouyt internet access. Please bring your National Insurance number.

Hampstead and Kilburn hustings

9 April - Queen's Park Residents Association (QPARA) - St Anne's on Salusbury Rd - 7:30pm

10 April - St Andrew's church hustings, Finchley Road - 8pm

13 April - Brent Stop the War hustings - Pakistan Community Centre, NW2 4PU - 7:30pm

15 April - WHAT hustings - Hampstead Synagogue, NW6 1AX - 7pm

17 April - Church of the Transfiguration, 1 Wrentham Avenue, NW10 3HT - 8pm

19 April - Brondesbury Park Synagogue

21 April - Camden Federation of Private Tenants - Swiss Cottage Library - 7pm

22 April - Ham & High hustings at JW3, Finchley Road - 8pm

April 15th at 7pm. IHustingswill be held at Tavistock Hall (behind the Methodist church)., Harlesden high Street

You are invited: This event gives you the opportunity to meet the candidates, listen to their manifestos and points of view on decisive electoral issues, and ask them questions before you decide who to vote for. 

All the parliamentary candidates for Brent Central have been invited and the following have confirmed their attendance:

Labour Candidate, Dawn Butler
Conservative candidate, Dr. Alan Mendoza
Green Party candidate, Shahrar Ali
TUSC Candidate, John Boyle
(original notice said Ibrahim Taguri as Independent but he has since stood down)

Jubilee and Metropolitan lines closed for Easter weekend

From Transport for London

Jubilee line On Friday, Saturday and Sunday, there will be no service between Waterloo and Wembley Park while we replace the tunnel lining at Bond Street, replace points at Neasden and track at Finchley Road. On Monday, the closure extends to Stanmore.

Metropolitan line Trains will not run between Aldgate and Northwood/Uxbridge all Easter weekend to allow for points work at Harrow and Neasden and track replacement work at Finchley Road. Additional Piccadilly line services will run between Uxbridge and Rayners Lane.

Brent Central candidates talking green at the Learie Constantine Centre

From Brent Friends of the Earth

Photo: Jonathan Goldberg      

Parliamentary candidates for Brent Central were questioned on their green credentials at Brent Friends of the Earth's Eco Hustings last Thursday in Willesden.

Green candidate Shahrar Ali, Labour’s Dawn Butler, Conservative Alan Mendoza and UKIP's Stephen Priestley, along with Ollie Hayes, Campaigner for Friends of the Earth, were on the panel. Friends of the Earth's Energy and Climate Change Campaigner, Rose Dickinson took the chair. The panel faced an audience of 60 local residents and party supporters at the Learie Constantine West Indian Association. John Boyle of TUSC, and the Liberal Democrats were also invited.

Climate change, fracking, fuel poverty, TTIP, industrial farming and air pollution were amongst the the issues discussed.

Viv Stein, Spokesperson for Brent Friends of the Earth says, “This election has come at a crucial time for our future. In order to avoid catastrophic climate change we need to leave 80% of fossil fuels in the ground, and invest in renewable energy instead. The current coalition promised to be 'the greenest Government ever' but have failed to live up to this. They've supported gas and oil companies with huge tax breaks, and have damaged investment in green energy in the UK by cutting incentives for renewables.”

“It was good to hear all the candidates talking green, but they and their parties will need to deliver robust, joined-up and sustainable policies to provide a secure future for us all.”

“We asked candidates to sign a pledge that they won't support fracking in Brent or elsewhere, but as yet only Labour,* the Green and UKIP candidates have signed up.”

You can check which candidates have signed the frack free pledge at HERE   Videos of the meeting available HERE

* Note from Martin Francis:  John Boyle, the TUSC candidiate has pointed out that Dawn Butler has NOT signed according to the  FOE website. He has signed on behalf of TUSC. In Brent North only Scott Bartle, the Green candidate, has signed.  LINK

Brent install 24 hour security as they take over the Stonebridge Adventure Playground buildings and land which they intend to destroy

Brent Play Association handed over the keys of Stonebridge Adventure Playground to Brent Council this morning, but not before they had secured the Head of Assets signature on the handover document.

The BPA were told that Brent Council were installing 24 security cover in the playground. I wonder how much that will cost - and what are they afraid of? 

Protecting something they will destroy seems to be the ultimate irony...

Wembley Crime Preventer Jeremy Zeid steps down after advocating Obama kidnap

Jeremy Zeid with Nigel Farage

Jeremy Zeid, UKIP candidate for Hendon has stood down following publicity over his Facebook statement that Israel should kidnap President Obama and put him on trial. LINK

He said:

“Once Obama is out of office the Israelis should move to extradite the bastard or ‘do an Eichmann’ on him and lock him up for leaking state secrets.”

“Just kidnap the bugger, like they did to Eichmann,” he added in a comment, referring to the Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, who was captured in Argentina in 1960 and put on trial in Israel.

 This advocate of kidnapping is a member of Wembley Crime Prevention LINK

NB This is not an April 1st joke.