Salvaging something in the Wreckage. by Les May

THERE’s an understatement!

Last Thursday was not a good day for Labour. I’ve heard three explanations so far; Mandleson ‘It was a hangover of Jeremy Corbyn’, Starmer ‘We lost the trust of working people’, my wife ‘Labour should have focussed on Tory stinginess towards the NHS workers’.

I have a different view. My guess is that what scuppered Labour under Starmer is what scuppered Labour under Corbyn. It’s called Brexit. The people who wanted it in 2019 still want it in 2021. They associate the Tories with Brexit, Labour with being at best lukewarm about it and at worst against it. Whether its downside will have become apparent by 2024 or 2029 is unknown. Perhaps the older Brexiteers will have fallen off their perch or the young ones begun to wonder what all the fuss was about. For the moment Labour is stuck with Starmer and we are all stuck with Boris.

So what can be salvaged. Starmer is probably feeling safe for the moment because the rest of the front bench is so unprepossessing. It’s just possible that Starmer will come to realise that eventually he has to reconnect with those supporters who gave the Labour party a distinct ‘buzz’ under Corbyn and are now leaving or just drifting away from it, though I doubt it. Many of these will be the people who went out ‘on the knocker’ at election time to drum up support from Labour. They won’t be doing that in 2024.

And what about chancer in chief Boris? As we are stuck with the Tories for at least three more years what can we make of this? Curiously enough the results may have an upside. Remember all those particularly nasty sounding Tories who had such a lot to say during the Brexit debate? Remember how Boris had to find a new Chancellor who was more amenable to spending money to fund furlough during the pandemic? Waiting in the wings are a lot of ‘small state’, low public spending zealots. For the moment at least they are unlikely to be able to eject Boris.

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

Trade with EU slumps after Brexit

TRADE groups have challenged government claims that post-Brexit freight had returned to 'normal' last month following a record fall in January, saying there were 'fundemental problems' with new trade barriers that were 'real and costly'.

In Januarry after the Brexit transition period ended, according to the Office of National Statistics, UK goods exports to the EU fell 40.7% while imports deopped 28.8%. These were the biggest declines since comparable records began in 1997.

There have been no similar declines in Britain's trade with non-EU countries. This suggests what's happening is likely to be related to Brexit controls and are not down to the consequences of the coronavirus surge and the January lockdown.

David Frost, Boris Johnson's leading advisor on Europe, had claimed that factors like stockpiling before Brexit came into effect on January 1st, meant their was 'less need to move goods in January', and Covid lockdowns had also 'reduced demand' for goods.

'These effects are strting to unwind' he said, adding that freight levels had returned to 'normal levels' since the start of February.

This is now being disputed by the haulage industry, which pinpointed the rise in the number of lorries returning empty yo the continent from the UK. According to a report in the Financial Times this weekend: 'Before Brexit, about 30% of lorries returning to the EU were typically empty. French port data has suggested the figure has risen to 50% in the first two months of this year,...'

Fresh food exports were hit particularly hard. For example new border controls have resulted in the seafood industry experiencing an 83% fall of in sales to Europe, according to Scotland Food and Drink, a trade association. Shane Brennan, chief executive of the Cold Chain Federation, which represents the perishable products industry, said that while trading conditions had impoved since January, but he added: 'I wish the government spent as much time listening to business concerns as they do searching for ways to spin the trade figures.'

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

Is Trump Expendable? by Les May

I’VE never bought into the idea that Labour losing last year’s General Election was because a Corbyn led government’s policies made it ‘unelectable’. I think a more plausible explanation is that Labour’s so called ‘Red Wall’ crumbled because those voters wanted ‘Brexit’ and knew that Johnson would deliver it, but Corbyn couldn’t be guaranteed to. The intervention of a Brexit party candidate in my constituency effectively helped to defeat Labour.

Those who voted Tory at the last election came from two ‘tribes’, each of which spoke their own language, had their own values and were incomprehensible to each other. One was the tribe which always voted Tory; the other was the tribe made up of those who usually voted Labour, or not at all, but who for their own reasons simply wanted to leave the EU.

Britain will leave the EU on the last day of the year. Job done! Why vote Tory next time? Boris Johnson knows this, that’s why he is so eager to push his ‘levelling up’ agenda which seems to me no more than a rebranding of the old ‘trickle down’ economics of Margaret Thatcher.

Donald Trump’s sojourn at the White House came about because two ‘tribes’, incomprehensible to each other, put him there in 2016. One tribe was drawn from Americans whose livelihoods were threatened because the industries they worked for were losing ground to cheaper foreign imports or were simply past their sell by dates like coal production, the inhabitants of the so called ‘rust bucket states’. The other tribe was composed of socially conservative, for which read abhors homosexuals, same sex marriage and abortion, devout, Bible immersed, fundamentalist Christians. Trump knew exactly what he was doing selecting Mike Pence to be his Vice-President. Pence is the real deal. At the end of the first meeting between the two he suggested they hold hands for a short prayer.

Trump now faces the same problem as Boris Johnson. He’s delivered a Supreme Court bench with a built in conservative majority which could last for the next thirty or forty years which his Bible bashing supporters can reasonably expect to deliver the sort of socially conservative rulings they want to hear. Job done! Why vote for an ersatz vulgarian like Donald Trump when you can have the real deal in the shape of someone like Pence in four years time?

The smart money is on Trump still being a major force in the Republican party in the next four years. I’m not so sure.

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

Do Black Lives Matter?

  by John Wilkins

DISCRIMINATION of people from whatever social/ethnic group must be discouraged. Debate on Brexit unduly focussed on immigration, which sadly encouraged some with little knowledge of the benefits over centuries of immigration, to justify their xenophobia against East Europeans, people from BAME heritage and others.  Now we are faced with the apparent disproportionate infection and deaths in the BAME community and the renewed focus on discrimination by police forces in the US, and to a degree this country, against people of colour.   If we agree that discrimination is wrong, then it becomes far worse when it is institutionalised.

However, I want to focus on why people from African and Caribbean heritage need all our support.  My views on how we got to impasse were reinforced when I listened to a black health care assistant on ITV news.  She was sacked for complaining about poor quality of PPE and leaving work to get her own.   On her return to her shift she was fired.  Interviewer Emily Morgan asked her what her mother, a nurse, would have done in the same situation. The lady said her mother would have been more compliant and accepted the situation without complaining.

This anecdote sums up the problem faced by the black people here and particularly in the US. Centuries of abuse have taught many to be compliant in order to firstly survive and then get educated, certainly if they wish to progress in society.  Why else would a some black people, including a lawyer on Channel 4 News, be so vociferous in defending Trump's handling of the protests over the killing of George Floyd?

As the song goes:  'The times they are a changing'. Large - scale protests in the US and across the world have been swelled by people of diverse ethnicity with one placard I like saying 'White silence = violence'. EU's Fundamental Rights Group stated that EU countries 'must try to eradicate discrimination, harassment and violence against black people'.  They also admitted that 'racial harassment, violence and discriminatory ethnic profiling are commonplace in Europe'.

Violence rarely succeeds in reversing discrimination, it often leads to greater violence.  What can be the way forward?  Black representation needs to increase in police and politics in particular, with more at the top of those fields and in the boardroom.  I will make my observations first before quoting from two leading black voices.

Now married to a Nigerian I have spent a lot of time contacting my previous MP about the worsening situation there with regard to sectarian violence in Nigeria.  Try as I could I found little real desire to speak out by African friends and found some dismissive of it as a problem.  I found a lot of Africans are happy to talk politics but do not wish to get actively involved.  Which is why I was saddened that one Nigerian, Deyika Nzeribe, was so involved he put up to challenge Andy Burnham for the Mayor of Greater Manchester, but tragically passed away shortly before the elections were held.

So I would like to echo the plea that Lord Simon Woolley made at a Black History Month event at Manchester Cathedral last year. #  He brought a few young people forward at the end of his presentation and urged them to work with their community and if possible get involved in politics.

Next a few comments which I found from Charles Critchlow, formerly National Chair of BAPA (Black and Asian Police Association).  Speaking from 30 years experience in the police he says “Black Representation matters greatly, but Black police leaders are of little use in the struggle for racial justice as long as they are selected, nurtured and developed exclusively within a system that maintains white supremacy”.  He adds: “Racism is so hardwired within the British system and psyche that it’s often impossible to penetrate”.  Therefore “this is why we need to develop our leadership as much as possible, independent of this poisonous system”.

Other groups have suffered from discrimination but have have found the ability to organise and get more involved in the political landscape and have been more vocal.  Although it is understandable that people from different backgrounds band together, this can lead, and has led, to those with the weakest voice losing out. In many cultures a black person is placed at the bottom of the pile.  Accounts of Nigerians' treatment in China and Chinese exploitation of Africa shows contempt for black people.  With regard to the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca, a ritual to promote the bonds of brotherhood and sisterhood by showing everyone equal in the eyes of Allah, there seems a hierarchy.   I am told by black Muslims it is Arabs first, SE Asian second and black Muslims bottom.  In S. Africa, even after apartheid it is whites followed by Asians, with most blacks at the bottom.  Even in the English language black has a surfeit of bad connotations, eg. black looks, blacklisted, black sheep of the family, black market, blackmail etc.

I will finish on a positive note. I see many young black voices coming out to seek an end to racism improve well-being and standing of the black community.  A local group here in Greater Manchester, CAHN (Caribbean and African Health Network), has raised awareness of medical problems more prevalent in their communities, such as diabetes, lupus, sickle cell etc.  They have also raised the profile of the black community through helping in events like Black History Month, remembering the Windrush generation as well as their health seminars.

I hope that the black voices will be more strident to chip away at decades of indifference to their plight.  Three things need to happen: stronger family units, better education and more political involvement.   Education is now more valued but there is, as Charles Critchlow says, a need for black leaders to come forward who can 'maintain a firm connectedness with the hopes and aspirations of our people and be in the vanguard of true black empowerment, this is the challenge for us in the 21 st. century'.   I hope we can use the evil of police brutality in the killing of George Floyd can be a catalyst for real change in reducing racism in ALL its forms.

# Lord Simon Woolley is a political and equalities activist.  He is the founder and CEO of Operation Black Vote and the Chair of the Prime Minister’s Race Disparity Unit.

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

English speakers: Grappling with the Grammar

 by Brian Bamford

SOME time ago my co-editor, partly-what jokingly, questioned my spelling and grammatical abilities, and I was reminded of this when more recently a commentator and meticulous Marxist complained in a P.S. 'You can at least take the trouble to spell my name correctly.'
 

The name, Charles Charalambous, had a French ring to it and, to be honest, I had some trouble getting it right.

 'FORGET GRAMMAR' & start 'acquiring a vocabulary'

As it happens I'm just reviewing a book entitled 'The Conspiracy of GOOD TASTE', and I was researching what the art critic Wyndham Lewis had had to say about vulgarity, slang and what he calls slum city English, as well as his thoughts on art and architecture.  On this very subject of the English language Lewis in his essay 'MEN WITHOUT ART' commenting on H.L. Mencken's treatise, The American Language, had cause to write:

'English is of all languages the simplest grammatically and the easiest to make into a Beach-la-mar* or pigin tongue.  Whether this fact, combined with its "extraordinary tendency to degenerate into slang of every kind," is against it, is of some importance for the future - for it will have less and less grammar, obviously, and more and cosmopolitan slang. - Mr Mencken is of the opinion that a language cannot be too simple - he is all for Beach-la-mar.  The path towards analysis and  the elimination of inflection, has been trod by English so thoroughly that, in its American form, it should today win the race for a universal volapuk.  Indeed, as Mr Mencken says, "the foreigner essaying it, indeed, finds his chief  difficulty, not in mastering its forms, but in grasping its lack of form.  He doesn't have to learn a new and complex grammar; what he has to do is forget grammar.  Once he has done so, the rest is a mere matter of acquiring a vocabulary".'

I suppose that I became more aware of the limited forms of English grammar, my mother tongue, not at school but while living in Spain and trying to get my head around Castillian Spanish using a book entitle 'Colloquial Spanish', while at the same time working among people speaking Valenciano [a form of Catalan] in the 1960s, yet I hadn't realised that English has this special quality through its limited grammatical form which lends it a vitality and richness that adds to its universality.  Wyndham Lewis warns 'There is, it is true, the difficulty of the vowel sounds'  It seems that according to him 'Standard English possesses nineteen distinct vowel sounds: no other living European tongue except Portuguese', so Mr Mencken says, 'possesses so many'.  Modern Greek, it seems, 'can boast only five'.  The answer, according to Lewis, is the neutralised vowel, which he says 'supported by the slip-shod speech-habits of the native proletariat, makes steady progress' in America.  

Perhaps, it occurs to me, this formless grammar of English may explain why the Brexit lobby triumphed in the referendum.  Wyndham Lewis writes that:  'Watch your vowels should be our next national slogan!'  And he adds, 'The fatal grammatical easiness of English is responsible, however, for such problems as these, as much as the growing impressionability of the English nation, and the proletarianization, rather than the reverse of the American.'

Hitherto, while England was a powerful empire, run by an aristocratic caste, its influence on speech and even the psychology of the American ex-colonies was paramount.  Yet today, the tables have been turned and cultural domination has for long been coming from Hollywood and elsewhere across the pond.  Lewis foresaw this in 1934 saying:  'the cinema brought the American scene and the American dialect nightly into the heart of England, and the "Americanising" process is far advanced, "done gones," "good guys" and 'buddies' spout upon the ips of cockney children as readily as those to the manner born of New York or Chicago: and no politically-powerful literate class any longer now, in our British 'Banker's Olympus,' to confer prestige upon an exact and intelligent selective speech.'

BREXIT, 'Airstrip One' & '1984'

Wyndham Lewis well understood the proletarianision of the anglo-saxon people in which he grasped, in the 1930s, that '...if America has come to England, there has been no reciprocal movement of England into the United States: indeed, with the new American nationalism, England is deliberately kept out: and all the great influence that England exerted formall - merely by being there and speaking the same tongue and sharing the same fundamental political principles - that is today a thing of the past.' 

It would seem that this process is now well developed and should progress further as we associate  ourselves more closely with the United States and Trump and his cultivation of American Nationalism.

Later than this in the 1940's George Orwell he portrayed England as 'airstrip one'.  Air  part of Oceania covers the entire continents of America and Oceania and the British Isles, the main location for the novel, in which they are referred to as ‘Airstrip One’.   Within the novel, London is the capitol of the province called Airstrip One, which is itself part of the nation of Oceania. Oceania is one of three world powers, and is composed of the Americas, the Atlantic islands including the British Isles, Australasia, and the southern portion of Africa.  In this novel unofficial language of Oceania is English (officially called Oldspeak), and the official language is Newspeak.

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

*   C19: quasi-French, from bêche-de-mer (trepang, this being a major trading commodity in the SW Pacific; hence the name was applied to the trading language)

**  commenting on 'Air Strip One' one commentator writes:  'I'm pretty sure it's a satirical jab at the perceived takeover of Britain by the United States.  Just as in real life the US has filled Britain with its airbases, in the world of 1984 the entire country is seen as just a minor offshoot of US military power, a mere "airstrip" for the USAF to launch their warplanes from. We already know that the United States has taken over Britain; this is stated explicitly at the very start of Chapter III (War is Peace) of Emmanuel Goldstein's magnum opus:'

Derek Pattison on class & delusion

I THINK both Wallace and David Selbourne would do well to read Orwell's 'Politics and the English language'.  Much of what Wallace has written here along with the quotes from Selbourne, would be barely comprehensible to most people. It is pretentious academic verbiage that doesn't illuminate at all.

The cloth cap Tory or the Tory in clogs, is a well known archetype within the English working class and I meet them frequently. We've always known there were plenty of Tory voters who lived in council houses and why do you think the Irish socialist, Robert Tressell called his famous book the 'Ragged-Trousered Philanthropist'? You can't read Tressell's book without being fully aware that his socialist character, Owen, (Tressell himself), is largely contemptuous of many of his fellow workers for their political ignorance and apathy, their conservative outlook and the fact that they acquiesce, in their own exploitation. "They were the enemy" Tressell wrote, they not only "submitted like so many cattle to the existing state of things, but defended it, and opposed and ridiculed any suggestion to alter it."

It is often said of the book that you can identify many of the characters with people you know and that is perfectly true.  The same arguments that you find Tressell's working men having between themselves, you can still hear played out to this very day.

However, it would be a great mistake to tar all the working class with the same brush as middle-class academics, who write about them,are inclined to do. Anyone who has been involved in English left politics, will know, that most of the participants are middle-class university types, the sort who make up the bulk of the Labour Party membership today.

Yet, the people who most influenced me politically, were not academics like Dave Selbourne, who I knew as a student, but ordinary working-class people, like the anarchist copytaker, Jim Pinkerton, from Ashton-under-Lyne and the opera buff, Jack Macpherson, who lived in a council house with his wife Margaret, in Dukinfield. Both these men were representative of what I would call, the class conscious working-class, politically savvy, as well as highly cultured.

I think Brexit is a big mistake, for a variety of reasons, and though it seems to have politicised many working class people, who previously may have been indifferent or apathetic to politics and felt powerless, I suspect it will be economically damaging to many of the Brexiteers in the long run. Yet, one can't deny, that with Brexit, the worm has turned; the working-class voter has found a voice and far from feeling impotent and powerless as they used to do, they now know they have some influence and can make a difference. Now the genie is out of the bottle it might be difficult to put it back.

Brexit, the most pointless, masochistic ambition in our history

by

Ian McEwan

IT’s done.  A triumph of dogged negotiation by May then, briefly, Johnson, has fulfilled the most pointless, masochistic ambition ever dreamed of in the history of these islands.  The rest of the world, presidents Putin and Trump excepted, have watched on in astonishment and dismay.  A majority voted in December for parties which supported a second referendum.  But those parties failed lamentably to make common cause.  We must pack up our tents, perhaps to the sound of church bells, and hope to begin the 15-year trudge, back towards some semblance of where we were yesterday with our multiple trade deals, security, health and scientific co-operation and a thousand other useful arrangements.

The only certainty is that we’ll be asking ourselves questions for a very long time. Set aside for a moment Vote Leave’s lies, dodgy funding, Russian involvement or the toothless Electoral Commission. Consider instead the magic dust. How did a matter of such momentous constitutional, economic and cultural consequence come to be settled by a first-past-the-post vote and not by a super-majority? A parliamentary paper (see Briefing 07212) at the time of the 2015 Referendum Act hinted at the reason: because the referendum was merely advisory. It “enables the electorate to voice an opinion”. How did “advisory” morph into “binding”? By that blinding dust thrown in our eyes from right and left by populist hands.

READ MORE

Is Labour losing its traditional voters?

by Brian Bamford

A POST ELECTION REPORT   from  Steve Gillan (POA), the TUC-JCC General   Secretary, POA, claimed 'Brexit was a key issue' and Labour lost 37% of leave voters who voted Labour in 2017, and 21% of remain voters who voted Labour in 2017.

A recent comment in Heywood and Middleton from a Labour canvasser, campaigning on the doorstep, told me people were closing their front doors when they realised it was Labour on the knocker.  

It was said that this dislike seemed to be down to two things: an intense dislike of Jeremy Corbyn and Labour's stance on Brexit.

Heywood, near Rochdale, has long been a solid Labour constituency but at the General Election in December the local Labour candidate was defeated by the Conservative.  

Steve Gillan in his report also claimed 'we should be building on, increasing and challenging the growth of the far right, anti-semitism and Islamophobia.'

 Yet,  as the Secretary of Tameside TUC, I wrote twice to Jeremy Corbyn asking him where he stood as regards the case of the persecuted Pakistani Catholic Asia Bibi, who had been sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan.  She had drank water from a cup used by Muslim fruit pickers to quench her thirst and had spent eight years on death row.  The family sought asylum for Asia in the UK but nobody from Theresa May's government was prepared to meet her husband and daughter when they came to London.  May refused asylum to the family because she said it could lead to racial unrest in the UK and put the lives of British diplomats at risk in Pakistan. 

Meanwhile, Corbyn never gave us a reply and I'm not aware of him speaking publicly about her case. We concluded that he was frightened of alienating the Muslim Labour vote.  I asked a Labour Party friend to speak to Angela Rayner about Asia Bibi. Rayner told him that Labour was supportive but the problem was the family hadn't applied for asylum in the UK, which was untrue.  Corbyn, did however, speak out publicly in support of the Isis bride, Shamima Begum, demanding that her British citizenship be restored. Asia Bibi and her family were eventually given asylum in Canada where she campaigns on behalf of other persecuted Christian's in Pakistan.

The Heywood and Middleton constituency in Lancashire has a strong Roman Catholic presence, having received immigrants following the Irish potato famine in the 19th Century.   Among today's fashionable addicts they they are now yesterday's people and the recent failure of Rochdale's Labour councillors to condemn an axe attack on four tree surgeons working in the Newbold area of Rochdale in October 2017 by an Asian gang shouting 'white bastards' at them, seems to be a symptom of post-modernity.  This might sound like blatant 'Orientalism', but the thing is Irish Catholics are no longer the flavour of the month in politics, and the local Labour Party is more inclined to wag-its-tail and fly the flag of Kashmir or Pakistan outside Rochdale Town Hall these days. This may go some way to explaining why Heywood and Middleton, which is one of the two Rochdale constituencies, now has a conservative MP.  Labour is so frightened of offending the Asian clans that it appears to be losing the white working class.

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

Robert Harris on Boris Johnson

IN an interview over Lunch with the FT soon after General Election the writer, confident of Tony Blair, and political pundit, the classist Robert Harris, told Frederick Studeman that 'Every triumph has to be paid for,' he said, with an eye to his researches on classical Rome, believing Johnson will now have to deliver on his promises.  He added that Labour could be 'in quite a strong place in 2024 because the Tories won't have their two great advantages - "get Brexit done" and Jeremy Corbyn'.

There is a recognition however that it will be necessary to reorient the Labour party, and that would not be easy.

Meanwhile, Harris muses:  'One of the things I did learn from writing the Cicero books is the obvious one:  that in every great victory lie the seeds of subsequent defeat.'

His classical interpretation of the prime minister is that Johnson has a 'great man' view of power.   Harris says:  'He's, let's say, flexible in his approach.  I don't think he is guided.'

So expect some surprising twists and turns, the ditching of past policies and allies.  If Johnson wants to hold on to his newly won northern territories, then he can't have a hard, recession-inducing Brexit.

Boris is likened in the inerview to the Roman politician Publius Clodius Pulcher (died 52 B.C.) who was one of the leading demagogues in the 1st century B.C.  As tribune, he wielded nearly as much power as Julius Caesar or Pompey.

Harris says:  'One of the things that I did learn from writing the Cicero books is the obvious one: that in every great victory lie the seeds of subsequent defeat.'

Johnson will now have to deliver, according to Harris; adding 'Politics is just relentless.... nothing ever ends.  You get Brexit and then there'll be an NHS winter crisis.' 

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

Dispiriting election redraws political map of UK

'This is an awful result', said Dave Smith 

of the Blacklist Support Group

by Brian Bamford

 
LAST SATURDAY the Financial Times leader writer began an editorial thus:
'A dispiriting election has produced a seismic outcome.  Britain's political landscape has been redrawn as it was by Tony Blair's New Labour victory in 1997, or Margaret Thatcher's win in 1979.  The Conservative landslide is a vindication of Boris Johnson's strategy of going all-out for a new Brexit deal and building his campaign around delivering it....  Yet the result, combined with the Scottish National party's surge in Scotland and nationalist gains in Northern Ireland, will strain the integrity of the UK.'

At the same time in an e-mail written immediately following the election Dave Smith secretary of the Blacklist Support Group, which has been consistently loyal to the Labour Party wrote:
'This is an awful result for the entire labour movement.

'Whatever people's thoughts on Corbyn or Brexit; the Labour manifesto commitments on workers rights, NHS & public services, renationalisation of rail & utilities, house building and the climate were supported by the majority of the population.  All these things are now at risk from a right wing Johnson government.'

Yet prior to the election in another e-mail he had wisely warned us:  'working people should never place dewy eyed trust in politicians, lawyers or union leaders to solve our problems for us; continuing to build a movement remains essential.' 

But what really happened under the Attlee Labour Government of 1945?

MILITARY BLACKLEGS & the 1945 LABOUR GOVERNMENT 

Dave Smith does well to remind us that we should not 'place dewey eyed trust in politicians' etc.   for within six days of the Labour Government taking office in 1945, it sent conscript troops into the Surrey Docks, London, to break a ten-week-old strike against a wage-cut....

Yet in a Labour amendment to the Military Training Bill, in Hansard on May 12th, 1939, this same Labour Party had declared:
'No conscript should be required to take duty in aid of the civil power in connection with a trade dispute, or to perform, in consequence of a trade dispute, any civil or industrial duty customarily performed by a civilian.'

Surely there is some inconsistency here?

THE GREAT ILLUSION 

In 1959, on the Aldermaston CND march, some trade union critics, who described themselves as 'syndicalists', not unlike Dave Smith of the Blacklist Support Group today, claimed at that time:  'we believe many sincere but starry-eyed Labour supporters have already half-forgotten the events during those six years in which every Socialist principle was betrayed by the politicians... [and that] It is no service to the working class for the truth to be hidden, however embarrassing and unpalatable it may be for some people.'  (How Labour Governed 1945-1951 - DIRECT ACTION PAMPHLET:  Publications Committee, SWF).

 THE LABOUR PROGRAM in 1945

Like Len McCluskey said last week about the panicky policy incontinence of the current Labour Party, the 1945 Labour Government, with a vast majority, had an economic programme based on two principles - 'a give-away programme and state control of economic functions'.

Dave Smith in his generally depressing Tweet continues to argue in this gloomy vain:

'For blacklisted construction workers, our hope for a public inquiry into the Consulting Association scandal now appears to be off the agenda for the next few years at the very least.' 

Bro. Smith was here pinning his faith on Page 48 of the Labour Manifesto:

'We will establish public inquiries into historical injustices including blacklisting and Orgreave, and ensure the second phase of the Grenfell Inquiry has the confidence of all those affected, especially the bereaved families and survivors.'*

When I last spoke personally to Dave Smith in 2015, at a Blacklist Support Group conference on  'Bullying, blacklisting and whistleblowing' at a two-day event at the University of Greenwich, I expressed my concerns and doubts about his hopes about getting a future Labour Government to solve the problem of blacklisting etc. by creating a distinguished public inquires.  Since 1979, when the alternative newspaper RAP had first exposed Cyril Smith, I long had the experience of seeking public inquires owing to the work I had put in to get something done about child abuse in Rochdale and beyond.  Sadly, by the time the inquiry will finally get to publish its report many of the alleged victims will be beyond help.

The Blacklist & the Consulting Association

Tameside Trade Union Council in Greater Manchester, has been involved with what later became known as the 'BOYS ON THE BLACKLIST' during the Daf dispute in Manchester's Piccadilly in 2003.  That was well before it had been finally confirmed that the blacklist actually existed in 2009** by subsequent events in which the Information Commissioner raided an office of the Consulting Association in Droitwitch, Cheshire.

As the Financial Times leader above indicates the political landscape of the UK  has changed substantially.  But it is not the end of history which some may claim.  The nationalist issues both in Scotland and Northern Ireland, as the FT editor suggests, may still come back to haunt the Tory Government.

Dave Smith is right in his blunt response to be 'gutted' by the outcome!  It is a slap in the face for what passes for the British left.  But we at Northern Voices have always been clear that we have historically even less faith in politicians than Dave Smith has ever had.  George Orwell told the poet Stephen Spender that he always avoided going to cocktail parties to mix with literary folk for fear it may interfere with his own critical judgement of their literary work.  

Could it be that being based and rooted in London that Dave Smith and some of the Blacklist Support Group, may well have become too close to the some of the Labour politicians down there and that it could have clouded their judgement?

In the years since the late naughties that I have known them; Dave Smith and the Blacklist Support Group, have always struck me as one of the most decent phenomena on the British left in this country bar none, aside perhaps from my own personal friends among the Boys on the Blacklist in the North of England, and I don't think that those associated with my own political persuasion among the English anarchists are a patch on them.  Other parts of the British left, especially including the British anarchists, who have presented us with the politics of a shabby little shocker.  Although I believe that Dave Smith and the Blacklist Support Group are wholly committed to fairness and common decency they will be well aware that the Labour party, when in Government, has failed to make serious in-roads towards the abolition of British blacklisting. 

Despite what Dave Smith declares about us placing our faith 'dewey eyed trust in politicians'; I fear that these honourable activists may suffer from being too trusting of people inside the Westminster bubble.      

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

*  Page 48 of the Labour Manifesto:

"We will establish public inquiries into historical injustices including blacklisting and Orgreave, and ensure the second phase of the Grenfell Inquiry has the confidence of all those affected, especially the bereaved families and survivors. We will also consider a public inquiry in the case of Zane Gbangbola.

We will require judicial warrants for undercover operations and retain the Mitting Inquiry into undercover policing.

We will release all papers on the Shrewsbury 24 trials and 37 Cammell Laird shipyard workers and introduce a Public Accountability Bill".

The Blacklist Support Group are proud to have stood shoulder to shoulder on shared platforms for more than 10 years with campaigners fighting for justice for Orgreave, Grenfell, Zane Gbangbola, victims of undercover political policing, the Shrewsbury Pickets and Cammell Laird ship workers. We have demanded and fought for a public inquiry for over a decade - its is our campaigning that has led to this manifesto commitment.  We therefore whole heartedly support this pledge towards getting the truth we, and other working class miscarriages of justice, deserve.  But working people should never place dewy eyed trust in politicians, lawyers or union leaders to solve our problems for us; continuing to build a movement remains essential.  

Full manifesto available to view here: https://labour.org.uk/manifesto/

**  'During 2008/09 the Iinformation Commisioner's Office carried out an investigation into employment blacklisting in the construction industry.  As part of that investigation, the ICO seized information from a company called The Consulting Association.  Some of the information we seized amounted to a 'blacklist' of individuals who were considered to pose a risk to their employers if employed within the construction industry.'

***  
Following the blacklisting scandal the Labour Government came forward with regulations. These regulations are so weak that they will not deter blacklisting. The only recourse for someone who has been blacklisted still remains taking a case to an employment tribunal and financial loss has to be proved. UCATT has constantly argued for the regulations to be strengthened. They necessary changes are:

• Make blacklisting a criminal offence
• When a blacklist is discovered all those on it are automatically told.
• An automatic right to compensation for everyone blacklisted.
• For the regulations to be widened from the narrow confines of “trade union activities” to the wider “activities associated with trade unions”. Ensuring trade unionists can’t be blacklisted for taking unofficial industrial action, such as a ban on voluntary overtime.

Tories take Monkey Town in the North!

 This is the story of a small, south-east Lancashire town called Heywood.   A place that is also rather affectionately (or disparagingly) known as 'Monkey Town’.

Old Heywood postcard.

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

LAST NIGHT the Tory Party beat the Labour Party's incumbent, Liz McInnes, for the Heywood & Middleton constituency in Greater Manchester  to become the constituency’s first ever Tory MP, on a disastrous night for Labour nationally. 

The Tory victor, Mr Clarkson, agreed that national issues like Brexit likely contributed to his victory.

He said:  'It was a combination of factors. No result is about just one thing,

'Brexit was  an issue on the doorstep, but also people didn’t like Jeremy Corbyn - they didn’t want him to be Prime Minister - and that put a lot of people off voting Labour. A lot of people stayed at home.'

The former MP Liz McInnes, who had been MP for the constituency since 2014, remained at the count until the very end, putting on a brave face following the results, which saw the Conservatives receive 20,453 votes.  Ms McInnes came second with 19,790 votes.

The seat has, up until now, always been held by Labour.

This year, 47,641 ballots were issued, and 153 votes were rejected.  The new MP, Mr Clarkson was elected with a majority vote of just 663 votes, in one of the lowest turnouts in recent years.

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

Johnson Hides in Fridge To Avoid TV Interview

Johnson Hides in Fridge To Avoid TV Interview

The opinion polls strongly suggest that this Thursday, the turkeys will be voting for Christmas, and will elect Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party, with a majority. Ominously,  the following day will be Friday the 13th.

The Conservatives have now been in office for nearly a decade. Throughout this period, economic growth has been anaemic, real incomes have been largely stagnant, and people on lower incomes and benefits have borne the brunt of government imposed austerity. Almost half of all working adults in the UK, don't earn enough to pay income tax which starts at £12,500. Yet, despite this, slightly more working class people (DE voters) are expected to vote for the Conservatives tomorrow, than middle class people, (AB voters).

According to the opinion polls, the Conservatives have a ten to fifteen point lead over Labour.Why Labour should be failing to attract so many working-class voters is perplexing as is the question, as to why so many, vote against their own direct interests. 

Labour, are offering the electorate a - 5% pay rise for public sector workers; free dental checks; free hospital parking; free tuition fees; free broadband; free prescriptions; free personal care for the elderly; a £10 minimum wage for all those over 16; compensation for WASPI women; a 32-hour working week over a decade and the nationalisation of rail, mail, water, and energy.  

Although Boris Johnson is the bookies and pollsters favourite to win, he's regarded as something of a joke, rather like the uncouth and lecherous, Sir Les Patterson character, made famous by the Australian comedian Barry Humphries. For many English voters, this seems to be what makes him so attractive  - he's a jester, a comedian, who will deliver a Brexit that is likely to make them all poorer. 

Johnson was laughed at by a television audience when he was asked about trust and he declines to say how many children, he has fathered. His comments are often regarded as incendiary and offensive and he's inclined to put his foot in his mouth. The strategy of his campaign team has been to avoid scrutiny at all cost and to keep interviews and contact with the public to a minimum (see video). Johnson recently commented, that he had been off the booze during the campaign, and was spending his spare time doing quadratic equations and reading pre-Socratic philosophy.

John Major, the former Conservative prime minister is urging people not to vote Conservative on Thursday, because he believes Boris Johnson will be a disaster for Britain as will Brexit, and the former Conservative minister, Michael Heseltine, is out campaigning for the Liberal Democrats. 

Are the Tories afflicted with foot and mouth disease?

Stanley Johnson -'Bumbling, Blue-Blooded, Buffoon'

Two days ago in an article in the Guardian newspaper, the journalist Arwa Mahdawi, referred to a BBC interview with Stanley Johnson where he was told by the interviewer Joanna Gosling that a viewer had called his son Boris, "Pinocchio."  This was obviously meant to allude to the prime ministers reputation for mendacity and dissembling. Johnson le père, suddenly quipped: "Pinocchio? That requires a degree of literacy which I think the Great British public doesn't necessarily have... They couldn't spell Pinocchio if they tried."

In her article, Mahdawi says: "Johnson stated explicitly what has always been obvious: the Tory party thinks the British public are bunch of idiots." She said that she was amazed at how little anger there has been from the British public towards the comments of this "bumbling, blue-blooded, buffoon," and suggested that Americans would never have been so blasé about this if he had called the U.S. electorate illiterate. Mahdawi wrote:

"We still show ridiculous reverence towards the monarchy and embarrassing deference to aristocrats and old Etonians who rule us."

Mahdawi said that Stanley Johnson had made a serious error with his comments in that he strayed from the populist playbook, which says that you must always pretend it is the 'liberal elite' who always look down on ordinary people and adds: "You should try to conceal your disgust of the great unwashed if you want to get their vote."

It is notable how often the Tories have let the mask slip in showing their disdain and disgust for the great British public. A former Bullingdon Club member, Boris Johnson, often used the term 'oiks' when referring to the working-class and mocked the 16% "of our species" with an IQ below 85? Jacob Reese-Mogg mocked the Grenfell Tower victims, who he said, lacked common sense. Michael Gove, stated that people were driven to food-banks because they couldn't manage their finances. Similarly, the Conservative prospective parliamentary candidate for Hasting and Rye, Sally-Ann Hart, recently told voters that disabled people should be paid less because "they don't understand money.

Both Boris Johnson and his father Stanley, are remarkably gaffe prone, and that is why the prime minister is reluctant to give television interviews and to subject himself to scrutiny by formidable interviewers such as Andrew Neil. Both father and son have a tendency to put their foot in their mouth and are rather too loose with the lip. Yet, I suspect that most British politicians, have a rather low opinion of the intellectual abilities and political judgement of the British public and perhaps see their job, as "curbing the instincts of the mob."

In an unpublished memoir that he wrote in the late 1990s, Sir Gordon Reece, a former advisor to Margaret Thatcher, explained how in 1975 he approached the task of persuading more people to vote Conservative. Reece seemed to think that only dullard's voted Tory. He confessed that he'd told Margaret Thatcher that the type of people who were likely to vote for her, were not to be found among the readers of broadsheet newspapers and the watchers of serious political programmes and the longer, night-time news bulletins, nor were they much interested in politics. He told her:

"The people we had to reach would read the Mirror, increasingly the Sun, the Express, the Mail, the People, the News of the World. They would watch Coronation Street, Jimmy Savile, Top of the Pops and listened to Jimmy Young on the wireless. And any aspiring prime minister had better go to them, and not expect them to come to her." (Charles Moore, Margaret Thatcher - The Authorized Biography, Volume 1).

I think that one of the things that has become apparent since the referendum in June 2016, on whether Britain left or remained in the E.U., is that the issue of social class, is no longer a reliable indicator of voter intention when choosing which party a person might vote for. Some argue that age, education, and region, are now the main dividing lines in British politics. For example, it is known that some 70% of voters whose educational attainment is only GCSE or lower, voted to leave the E.U. while 68% of voters with a degree, voted to remain in the E.U. The over- 65s were more than twice as likely as under-25s, to have voted to leave the European Union and every region of the country except Scotland, Northern Ireland and London, voted to leave.

Half of UK working adults don't earn enough to pay income tax

Sir Keith Joseph

Averages conceal wide variations. The median annual UK income for 2019 is said to be £29,588. Yet, according to figures from HMRC, nearly half of all Working adults in the UK, pay no income tax because they earn less than £12,500 per annum, the figure where income becomes taxable.  

Many of the very wealthy avoid paying UK tax by becoming 'Non Dom' or pay themselves 'dividends' instead of 'incomes' which attract less tax. In the last 40 years, people in emerging economies and the world's richest people have seen the fastest growth in income. Wages in Western economies have grown more slowly.

Before we joined the E.C. (now the E.U.) in January 1973, Britain was known as the 'sick man of Europe' because its economy lagged behind countries such as France and Germany. In June 1974, seventeen months after we joined the EU, Sir Keith Joseph said this, in a speech at Upminster:

 "Compare our position today with that of our neighbours in Germany, Sweden, Holland, France. They are no more talented than we are. Yet, compared to them, we have the longest working hours, the lowest pay and the lowest production per head. We have the highest taxes and the lowest investment. We have the least prosperity, the most poor, and the lowest pensions."

Not much changes folks. And who did Sir Keith blame for all this? No, it wasn't the E.U.- he said it was all the fault of Labour and socialism. Since the onset of Thatcher and Regan, the world's richest, have seen their wealth soar into the stratosphere. That was what the Conservative revolution was all about.

According to a government report, Brexit is likely to lead to Britain becoming worse off.

Johnson and Cummings could face criminal charges as Met passes Vote Leave file to CPS!

Under Fire - Boris Johnson 

IT couldn't have come at a worse time for Boris Johnson. After being recently booed by medical staff at Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge and being told by Donald Trump that his 'Withdrawal Agreement on Brexit' (WAB), will hamper any trade agreement with the U.S. and make a future trade agreement unlikely, he's now learned that the Metropolitan Police have just referred a file on 'Vote Leave' to the Crown Prosecution Service for 'Early Investigative Advice'. The evidence submitted by the police could result in criminal charges being brought against the pro-Brexit campaign that was led by Boris Johnson and his key advisor, Dominic Cummings.

Last year, the Electoral Commission found that Vote Leave had broken electoral law by overspending  during the 2016 European Union referendum. The commission found that the campaign had funnelled £675,000 to the campaign by using another pro-Brexit group as a channel to avoid spending limits. Vote Leave was fined a total of £61,000. Others involved in Vote Leave, include Michael Gove, Dominic Raab, Priti Patel and Nigel Dodds, the D.U.P. MP for Belfast North.

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas who is campaigning for a second Brexit referendum, said:

The 'Evil Svengali' - Dominic Cummings

"I'm pleased that the Metropolitan Police have finally taken action on this after sitting on the papers for 16 months. Vote Leave was the campaign fronted by the man who is now our prime minister, Boris Johnson, and his chief advisor, Dominic Cummings. It's hard to imagine a more serious matter for our democracy..."

Vote Leave have always denied any wrongdoing.

Oborne calls on Britons to 'swallow their pride' and think again about Brexit!

In 2016, the right-wing Daily Mail columnist Peter Oborne, was an ardent Brexiter along with the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the E.U. in the referendum of June 2016. But in a 4,000 word article that was written for Open Democracy in April 2019, he called on Britons to think again and swallow their pride.

In the article Oborne argued that Brexit had paralysed the system and had turned Britain into a laughing stock. He asserts that Brexit is certain to make us poorer and to lead to lower incomes and lost jobs and says that Brexit, has led to the collapse of investment-led growth and the announcement of job losses at Nissan, Sony and Honda. Oborne points out that few of the 40 trade agreements that Liam Fox vowed to sign by March 2019, have been agreed and that prominent British backers of the Leave Campaign like James Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe, have already moved assets abroad.

Last year, that most prominent of Brexiteer's, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the chairman of the European Research Group (ERG), who advocates a clean break with the E.U., was forced to answer embarrassing questions about why the city investment firm 'Somerset Capital Management' (SCM), a firm in which he is a partner (but does not make investment decisions), had relocated part of its business to Dublin. The firm's prospectus had warned that Brexit was a 'risk' that may cause 'considerable uncertainty.'

Much of what Oborne says about the economic consequences of Brexit have been borne out by even government analysis. Last November (2018), a government report stated that the UK would be poorer economically under any form of Brexit, compared with staying in the E.U. 'Operation Yellowhammer' the government's own assessment of what could happen if Britain left the E.U. without a deal, warned of fresh food supplies decreasing, key ingredients being in short supply, and prices increasing which could impact vulnerable groups, because of problems caused by disruption and the inability to trade efficiently.

The problem with the referendum vote in June 2016 was that people were given two choices i.e. leave or remain, but they were never told what Brexit meant or what it might entail. A majority of MP's in the British parliament do not want to leave the E.U. because they think it is folly and will be economically ruinous. In short,  Brexit means different things to different people.  Although I believe people were sold a pup with Brexit and that its not a simple right/left issue, I nevertheless,  believe it is essentially a right-wing project. For neo-liberal free-market types like Gove, Raab and Johnson, leaving the E.U. will be an opportunity to get shut of a host of regulatory powers and to bin such things as environmental and consumer protections along with workers rights, to give Britain a competitive edge against our European neighbours - a kind of race to the bottom to attract inward investment.

As Oborne points out in this video, Brexit is also likely to lead to the break-up of the Union. If Brexit ultimately leads to the reunification of Northern Ireland with the Republic of Ireland and the demise of the Tory Party, then in my view Brexit might have been worthwhile. A recent poll in Northern Ireland found that a majority of people who live in the region did not consider themselves either Unionists or Nationalists and 51% said they were in favour of reunification. This figure is likely to increase now Northern Ireland has been annexed by the Johnson Tory government. No wonder Sein Fein like Boris Johnson's Brexit Deal.

Thomas Cook crisis: The Liberal explanation

Thomas Cook latest airline to fall foul of Brexit uncertainty betraying British industries

The Liberal Democrats have warned that Brexit uncertainty is sealing the fate of British industries already under pressure following the collapse of three major airlines since 2016. 

Thomas Cook's collapse follows UK airlines Monarch and flybmi who also ceased operations.

In a joint statement, Liberal Democrat MEP Jane Brophy and Manchester Lib Dem Leader John Leech said:

“As with other fallen airlines like Monarch and flybmi, Thomas Cook has been struggling for months against a backdrop of Brexit uncertainty. Clearly there are other issues that have played a part in these airlines' collapse. But can Government officials honestly say that Brexit did not play a part in this, or that they themselves couldn’t have acted sooner?

“The Civil Aviation Authority is clearly working hard to get people home in the short-term, and they should be supported and congratulated for those efforts.

“But the real tragedy here is the nearly 22,000 jobs, and 3,000 in Greater Manchester alone that have been lost. The knock-on effects of that are devastating. Hard-working people who have dedicated their working lives to this company deserve answers and reassurance that lessons will be learnt to prevent this from happening again."

Ends

Constructive Ambiguity Boris Johnson Style

by Les May

BORIS JOHNSON’S failure to date to get a General Election at a time of choosing has had the effect of forcing him into the position that when we do go to the polls he is going to have to give greater clarity about his real intentions.

Here are some facts.   In the 2016 Referendum 65% of Tory voters and 35% of Labour voters chose the Leave option.  And there the things we know for certain, end.  The rest is speculation and guesswork, and Johnson knows no more than the rest of us.

In particular what he doesn’t know is how many of those Tory Leave voters want the UK to leave the EU having signed an agreement, a.k.a. ‘a deal’, and how many don’t want any kind of deal.   The first of these, together with those who do not want to leave, probably have nowhere else to go in an election and will have to stay with the Tories even if there is no agreement, but Johnson needs to keep them all happy by dangling the prospect of an agreement in front of them to make sure they do. The second are more problematic.  If there is any prospect of him signing an agreement they are likely to vote for the Brexit party so he has to keep them happy too by dangling the prospect of no agreement in front of them.

If he could have secured an early election he could have faced both ways and got the votes of both groups in the certain knowledge that when the crunch came and one group was disappointed, there would be nothing they could do about it. Now he cannot do that.

Who said ‘Constructive Ambiguity’ was a Labour problem?

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

Vain Expectations on British Road to Socialism?

Blackballed MP, Chris Williamson, addresses Rochdale folk 

  by Brian Bamford

IN 1951,  I had a newspaper round and I use to deliver the odd copy of the Daily Worker to one customer up Long Hill in Rochdale.  The Daily Worker attracted my curiosity as it, the Renolds News and Sunday Citizen.^[5] and a Polish paper a refugee family took were unusual compared to the News Chronicle which my Dad read mainly for its coverage of horse racing and sport.  One day on my paper round I would read of a conference in which the slogan was 'FOR the MILLIONS & AGAINST the MILLIONAIRES', and the next I would see some story about a communist program about 'The British Road to Socialism'.

Last night, I listened to Chris Williamson, the Labour MP, who has fallen foul of some senior people in the Labour Party for making light of the claims of anti-semitism within the party, and for daring to suggest that there had been too much apologising for this 'sin'.  One can sympathise with him for the treatment he has received over this and for the vicious attempts to 'no-platform' him at events like the recent Manchester Peterloo commemoration: see (North West TUC Snubs Peterloo Rally over Chris Williamson MP!)

Yet there was something very quaint about Mr. Williamson's approach last night:  In 1951, Harry Pollitt, who had been elected as General Secretary of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) in 1929 wrote a Forword to the Programme titled 'The British Road to Socilism', which was adopted by the then Executive Committee of the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB).  In the Foreword Pollitt wrote:  

'This is the message of this programme. It is a call above all to the whole Labour Movement to recall its glorious traditions of struggle for the immediate interests of the working people, and to safeguard their future interests in a Socialist Britain.  But it is no less a call to the great majority of the British people to join with the Communist Party and the whole Labour Movement in the struggle to win a new future for Britain in the socialist world which history is now shaping.'

Those were the utterances of Harry Pollitt in 1951, when the country was then, as now we suspect, facing a General Election and I was about to start delivering the Daily Worker.   Allowing for the time lapse, the utterances of Chris Williamson last night were only slightly different in tone from those of Harry Pollitt almost almost 60 years ago.  His rhetoric was all too easy, suggesting we can do it; a sovereign Labour Government after Brexit could print the money and build a better Britain afresh, no trouble there he claimed.

Working people could take over failing companies to save them from the asset strippers, and establish cooperatives to manage business.  Denis Healey, when he was Chancellor, was wrong in the past to go to the IMF for money and fall into the hands of the Wall Street bankers.  'He should have listened to Tony Benn', who knew what was what!*

This is all post-facto 'What if?' stuff, if you like:  But, what if the James Callaghan government had accepted Tony Benn's 'Alternative plan B' in the 1970s would it have resulted in avoiding Thatcher, Hayek's 'The Road to Serfdom revisted', Milton Freedman economics, and the consequent problems of what came to be called neo-liberalism as Chris Williamson claimed in his theatrical performance last night?  **

Tony Benn admitted his own plan would result in a 'siege economy', but he claimed the difference is that in the monetarist course 'you will have the bankers with you and the British people, the trade unions, outside the citadel storming you; with mine it will be the other way round'.^[3] ***

All this was referred to in the speech of Chris Williamson last night at Woolworth's Social Club in Castleton, Rochdale, but it was not easy to discern among the gabbling annunciations from the megaphone beneath his mouth.  Les May has criticised this presentation in the post below entitled 'Our Answer to "No Platforming".'

Despite our concerns about his performance and some the things he has to say, we are anxious to continue to hear him speak.  Unlike some senior people in the Labour Party!

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

* Healey became Chancellor of the Exchequer in March 1974 after Labour returned to power as a minority government. His tenure is sometimes divided into Healey Mark I and Healey Mark II.^[21] The divide is marked by his decision, taken with Prime Minister James Callaghan, to seek an International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan and submit the British economy to IMF supervision. The loan was negotiated and agreed in November and December 1976, and announced in Parliament on 15 December 1976.^[22][23] Within some parts of the Labour Party the transition from Healey Mark I (which had seen a proposal for a wealth tax) to Healey Mark II (associated with government-specified wage control) was regarded as a betrayal. Healey's policy of increasing benefits for the poor meant those earning over £4,000 per year would be taxed more heavily. His first budget saw increases in food subsidies, pensions and other benefits.^[24]

 **  The Alternative Economic Strategy (AES) is the name of an economic programme proposed by Tony Benn, a dissident member of the British Labour Party, during the 1970s and 1980s.
The Secretary of State for Industry in the Labour government, Tony Benn, wrote a paper for his Department in January 1975, which he described in his diary: "It described Strategy A which is the Government of national unity, the Tory strategy of a pay policy, higher taxes all round and deflation, with Britain staying in the Common Market. Then Strategy B which is the real Labour policy of saving jobs, a vigorous micro-investment programme, import control, control of the banks and insurance companies, control of export, of capital, higher taxation of the rich, and Britain leaving the Common Market".^[1]
 
***  With Britain in economic crisis in October 1976, Benn put forward the AES in Cabinet with the partial support of Peter Shore.^[2] He claimed the two courses open to the government were the monetarist, deflationary course recommended by the Treasury and "the protectionist course which is the one I have consistently recommended for two and a half years...protectionism is a perfectly respectable course of action. It is compatible with our strategy. You withdraw behind walls and reconstruct and re-emerge".^[3] Benn further said that both courses were a "siege economy" but the difference is that in the monetarist course "you will have the bankers with you and the British people, the trade unions, outside the citadel storming you; with mine it will be the other way round".^[3] However the Cabinet rejected the AES (along with two other proposals) on 1/2 December and accepted the terms for a loan from the International Monetary Fund on 12 December.^[4]

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