Virtue Signalling & Petitioning Governments?

by Brian Bamford

ON the 14th, April Charles Charalambous commented: 

'We seem to be talking at cross-purposes.  An editorial 

in a political publication does not aim to be a philosophical tract, 

and by definition its starting-point is a particular worldview 

(which, evidently, you don't share).'

Charles Charalambous represents a body affiliated to the 

4th International and is editor of Labour Internationalist.

Northern Voices doesn't favour the kind of petitioning

culture which Mr. Charalambous credits by describing

this practice as a 'world view'.  We do not want to 

be a wet blanket, but we believe this approach could 

have unintended consequences.  Charles is a lead
signatory of the petition we publish beneath my critique.

BELOW A BODY of trade unionists have emerged in the current crisis to call upon the government to institute certain changes and to submit to a list of demands in  a campaign to relieve the pressures upon us.

Is it a wish list?  Or is it merely virtue signalling by persons who are simply displaying their own impotence?

It might be as well to recognise that there are more than one type of petition:

Protest petitions generally aim mainly to show discontent; they play the same role as demonstrations: safety valve, expression of dissatisfaction in relation to an act, decision or policy. In an age of internet and social media, protest petitions can gain traction very quickly.  The Trump petitions some time ago when 2 million people signed a petition opposing Donald Trump’s state visit to the UK are but one example of this type, as was the one that received over 4 million signatures asking for a second EU referendum.

Substantive petitions aim primarily to change a situation.  This tends to
relate to issues that people feel very strongly about, either because they are personal and affect them directly, or because they are part of a very strong
set of convictions held over a period of time.  So these are very different to protest petitions.  Recent examples include the petitions on Meningitis B,
the one(s) on Grouse shooting, and the one asking that stillborn babies are 
given a birth certificate – the latter one with far fewer signatures.   Ultimately, this type of petition aims to change a situation, but in the process of doing so it aims first and foremost to raise awareness.

Cristina Leston-Bandeira situates the process within a broader policy-
making context.  She explains that petitions are an effective way of raising awareness or showing discontent, and that the adoption of public demands
into policy remains subject to the usual political process.


She writes:
'As we know, it is very rare for policy change to happen quickly; if not 
originated by the government, it is usually the result of sustained campaigning through a variety of means. Whether a substantive petition achieves a change 
in policy is often not the main question.  The key starting point is whether it raises awareness of the issue, and whether it raises the profile of a specific 
issue enough to lead government to eventually agree for change.  After all, 
one of the most famous cases of petitioning – votes for women (if you prefer 
a more grown-up account then try here) – took a few years and more than 
one petition before it actually led to any change.  So, different petitions have different purposes and perform different roles.  Petitions also enable what is known as the “fire-alarm” role: an opportunity to raise issues bottom-up, 
outside the political agenda.'

In the case of the petition below this slow process in policy change may
simply serve to display the helplessness of the proponents of the demands.
Thus it could have the reverse effect to that intended by the signatories.

**************************************

Trade Union Petition Covid-19:

Let’s come together to push for the basic emergency measures 
that democracy requires.

We reject “One rule for the rich, another for the rest”!

Protect working people, not the banks and big business!

The working class must defend its own interests, and on an independent basis!

Requisition the £350 billion given to the banks and businesses 
and apply it to these emergency measures to directly protect the population:

– All personal protection equipment (PPE) of the necessary standard to be 
sourced immediately, including by requisition, and delivered immediately 
where needed by NHS staff and care-home staff;

– Requisition big companies to serve in the production of ventilators, masks,
testing kits, healthcare beds and everything that is lacking today in the NHS;

– Free diagnostic testing for all, free antibody testing for all. All private testing
and processing facilities, as well as all other private healthcare resources,
to be immediately requisitioned and incorporated into the NHS.

– Free distribution of masks to the whole population;

– Ban “temporary” lay-offs and job-cuts;

– Ban bogus self-employment;

– Full pay immediately, not in May or June, for all self-isolated workers, 
whatever their work status;

– Paid time off to care for children when there is no other option available;

- All employers to be legally bound by the Health and Safety at Work etc. 
Act 1974, the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, 
and the Employment Rights Act 1996, which together give employees the 
right to leave their place of work if they feel they are in “serious 
and imminent” danger;

– Financial security for all: scrap Universal Credit;

– Moratorium on all debt and the payment of rent and rental charges
(utilities, etc.);

– All social benefits and support allowances to be paid immediately, 
not in May or June;

– Staple foods and basic goods to be distributed for free to people in difficulty;

– Requisition vacant/available premises to provide accommodation to
the homeless and poorly-housed;

– Scrap all Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts, which have been
a tool for commercialising education and privatising the NHS;

– Repeal the Coronavirus Act 2020, replace it with properly scrutinised
measures that do not restrict civil liberties.

We, workers (full-time and part-time, on secure and insecure contracts), homemakers, pensioners, students and youth, say: These 
are immediate measures that are needed to avoid medical and economic carnage. They cannot wait.

We will not accept more of the same – what is happening now cannot be allowed to happen again.

First signatories:

Mike Calvert, Deputy Branch Secretary, Islington UNISON, London (pers. cap.)

Charles Charalambous, ex-President, Torbay and South Devon TUC (pers. cap.), Editor of Labour Internationalist

Stefan Cholewka, Secretary, Greater Manchester Association of Trades
Union Councils ((on behalf of GMATUC)

Sheila Coleman, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Jane Doolan, UNISON NEC member, Branch Secretary, Islington
UNISON, London (pers. cap.)

Paul Filby, Labour Party member, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Stephen Hall, President, Greater Manchester Association of Trades
Union Councils

Diana James, Assistant Branch Secretary, Islington UNISON, London
(pers. cap.)

Paul Kelly, Vice President, Greater Manchester Association of
Trades Union Councils

Doreen McNally, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Henry Mott, Branch Secretary, Southwark Unite, London (pers. cap.)

Billy Murphy, Unite Community, Liverpool (pers. cap.)

Tony Rimmer, Vice-Chair, Unite 567 Branch; Chair, Bootle CLP;
Liverpool47 surcharged Labour councillor (pers. cap.)

John Sweeney, Labour Party member, Leave activist, London (pers. cap.)

Margaret K. Taylor, Labour Party member, Treasurer, Rochdale
Metropolitan Borough Trades Council (on behalf of RMBTC)

Matt Webb, general secretary, Brighton & Hove District
Trades Union Council (on behalf of B&HDTUC)

Sarah Wooley, general secretary, The Bakers Food and Allied Workers Union (on behalf of BFAWU) 

I endorse these demands

In a personal capacity / On behalf of my organisation