Levelling The Gradient

by Les May

A COUPLE of weeks ago Kirsty Wark, the presenter of the BBC Two news and current affairs programme Newsnight, introduced an item which was supposed to deal with the question of discrimination in Britain using as an example the fact that there ‘weren’t many black CEOs’ (Chief Executive Officers). This intro told us little about whether there really is discrimination, and a lot about Wark’s priorities.

The assumption that you can lump all black, brown, Asian people together and label them BAME is a favourite modus operandi of armchair sociologists and media pundits.  This lazy approach to avoid thinking more deeply is akin to what has been called the ‘ecological fallacy’.  One example of this is the assumption that if one group is found to have, say a higher average income than another, then all members of the first group will have higher incomes than anyone in the second group. This is clearly nonsense.  Some individuals in the second group will be doing very nicely thank you and have incomes which are much higher than many of the people in either of the groups.   I have little doubt that Wark is significantly more wealthy than a very large number of white and non-white people alike.  She certainly has more power and influence.

By concentrating on single issues the questions raised by the huge inequalities in income, wealth, power and status we experience in the UK get ignored.  People like Wark give no sign of wanting to disturb the status quo and the hierarchies it fosters.  Without exploring the variation in income etc within BAME and white population we can never be sure that we are not mistaking differences caused by inequality as being caused by discrimination.

Is the observation, and at the moment it is just an observation, that people in the BAME population seem to be disproportionately affected by Covid 19 disease due to the factors which also disadvantage many of the white population, such as huge differences in income, wealth etc?  Asking this does not exclude the possibility that it results from discrimination, cultural norms or the prevalence of morbidities caused by so called ‘lifestyle’ factors such as diet and exercise, which in turn may themselves be a reflection of differences in wealth.

There is little appetite in the UK for recognising the effects of our very unequal society on the lives of our citizens, irrespective of their skin colour.  Even when studies to examine the impact of inequality are done, their findings are ignored. And it’s not just the Tories who are wilfully blind.  In February two of the candidates for the Labour leadership felt that a Jewish pressure group and a ‘trans’ pressure group needed their public support, but when the Marmot review which looked at differences in health outcomes appeared later in the month it had zero impact on the campaign.

The media gave prominence to only one finding; that ‘Female life expectancy declined in the most deprived 10 percent of neighbourhoods’ and ignored both the large disparity in life expectancy (LE) between people of higher and people of lower economic and social status, and that, irrespective of economic status women tend to live longer than men. (see page 18, Figure 2.4) reported in the review. (my emphasis).

http://www.instituteofhealthequity.org/resources-reports/marmot-review-10-years-on/the-marmot-review-10-years-on-full-report.pdf

These disparities also exist with regard to the disability free life expectancy (DFLE), i.e. the number of years of life someone will have free from disability.  The review referred to these differences as forming a ‘social gradient’.

What the review showed was that in England, the difference in life expectancy at birth between the least deprived 10% of the population and the most deprived 10% was more than 9 years for men and more than 7 years for women.  Life expectancy at birth for men living in the most deprived areas in England was 74 years, compared with 83 years in the least deprived areas; the corresponding figures for women were 79 and 86 years in 2016-18. (see pages 15-17, figures 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3) in the review.

With regard to disabilities in later life the review said, ‘The social gradient in disability-free life expectancy is steeper than the gradient in life expectancy.  As a result, people living in areas with more disadvantage not only expect to live a shorter life, but also to spend more of that shorter life with a limiting long-term illness.’ (my emphasis)

The effect of ongoing and future rises in the age at which people become eligible to receive a state pension (SPA) will be felt most strongly by those of lower economic status (aka ‘the least well off’).  Only people in the least deprived 20—30% of areas will reach SPA before they can expect to develop a disability. Those in the more deprived areas will spend years with a disability before they reach SPA.

The Marmot review simply referred to ‘people’; not ‘black’ people, not ‘brown’ people, not ‘minority ethnic’ people, just people.  There seems to be no data on differences in life expectancy between these groups and ‘white’ people which are free of the influence of the socio-economic characteristics of the areas in which they live, i.e. the ‘social gradient’.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the differences in life expectancy (LE) and disability free life expectancy (DFLE), which show a clear gradient with socio-economic status, will be equally applicable to these groups also.   Getting a few more ‘black’, ‘brown’, ‘ethnic’ faces around boardroom tables will have no positive impact on the life chances of the people who happen to have the same skin colour.

We have heard a lot in recent weeks about ‘flattening the curve’.  When we know that there is a socio-economic gradient which means that women and men in affluent areas have a life expectancy at birth which is 7-9 years longer than those in poor areas, then I would suggest we direct our collective effort to ‘levelling the gradient’.

Obsessing over ‘race’, to the exclusion of all other considerations is a form of identity politics which allows people, who by any reasonable measure are privileged, to pose and be seen as, victims.   This comment is equally applicable to other forms of identity politics.   I would suggest that it is the inequalities in the UK of income, wealth and power which should be the main focus of attention for those of us who see ourselves as being ‘of the Left’ and not the politics of identity.  This would benefit far more people than a narrow focus on skin colour, sex, gender or preferred sexual partner.

*******************************8

Laughing All The Way To The Bank: Who Says Politics Doesn't Pay?

Les May makes some interesting points in his recent article about pension inequality in the UK. Unlike Les, I am a 65-year-old man who won't get a State Retirement Pension (S.R.P.) until I'm almost 66-years old in September 2020. There was of course, another way of eliminating sex discrimination in retirement ages. The state retirement age for men could have been reduced to 60 in line with women, but this wasn't likely to happen. The full state UK pension is currently £168.60 and one of the lowest paid pensions of all the EU member states. 

Compared to some of the pensions paid to British and EU politicians it is derisory. According to campaigners from Open Europe, Neil and Glenys Kinnock, amassed a total of five publicly funded pensions, worth £4.4m, allowing them to retire on £183,000 a year. The campaign group estimated that the Kinnock's, claimed around £10m in European earnings from allowances, wages, and pension entitlements over a 15-year period. 

It was the Conservative Prime Minister, John Major, who put Kinnock forward for the job as a European Commissioner, after stating publicly that Kinnock "wasn't fit to run a whelk stall." Kinnock's wife joined him later on the EU gravy train.

An article that appeared on WalesOnline in 2013, gives the full details:-

Laughing All The Way To The Bank

"NEIL and Glenys Kinnock came under fire from critics last night as details of their

estimated £10m European earnings were calculated by a pressure group."

"Campaigners from Open Europe, which argues for greater transparency, calculated the pair’s multi-million-pound earnings from allowances, wages and pension entitlements over a 15-year period.

It worked out their salaries and perks included:

A total of £775,000 in wages for Mrs Kinnock and £1.85m for her husband, adding up to £2,625,000;
Allowances for Mrs Kinnock’s staff and office costs of £2.9m;

A £64,564 “entertainment allowance” for Lord Kinnock;

A total of five publicly-funded pensions, worth £4.4m, allowing them to retire on £183,000 a year;

A housing allowance that allowed them both to claim accommodation costs even though, as a married couple, they lived in the same house in the Belgian capital between 1995 and 2004.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance campaign manager Susie Squire yesterday attacked the scale of the earnings.

She said: “It does seem an awful lot, but anyone who has experience of the Brussels gravy train will be able to believe these figures.

“There are lots of eurocrats on massive pensions and massive salaries living the five-star lifestyle at taxpayers’ expense.

“Brussels isn’t at all transparent. It’s very difficult to get information about money which is being spent in the first place.”

Ukip’s newly-elected Wales MEP John Bufton said he was “appalled” at the amounts paid.

“It’s quite incredible and unbelievable,” he added. “The Welsh public will see this as an absolute farce.

“And the thought that Gordon Brown is so desperate he has to bring in Glenys Kinnock shows the whole thing just stinks.”

Asked by the Western Mail what he wanted to say about yesterday’s revelations, former European Union Transport Commissioner Lord Kinnock, 67, replied: “Nothing, absolutely nothing.”

Quizzed as to whether the figures reported were accurate, the former MP for Islwyn, who led the Labour Party to two general election defeats before quitting in 1992 then spending 10 years in Brussels, said: “I’m not making any form of response.”

Earlier this month, Mrs Kinnock, 64, quit as an MEP after 15 years. Last Sunday Labour lost one of its two European Parliament seats in Wales to Ukip as Labour came second to the Conservatives in Wales, capping a disastrous election performance.

Mrs Kinnock is to be given a life peerage and appointed to succeed Caroline Flint who resigned as Europe Minister, saying she was not content to be Gordon Brown’s “female window dressing”.

Yesterday, a spokeswoman for the Kinnocks, whose property portfolio includes a £815,000 home in Islington, North London and a £700,000 house in Peterston- super-Ely, outside Cardiff, disputed just one of Open Europe’s figures – a “transition allowance” Lord Kinnock received when he left Brussels in 2004, worth £355,143 at today’s exchange rate. She said the true figure was lower, but refused to reveal it.

Open Europe estimated Mrs Kinnock’s travel costs based on MEPs’ average.

It estimated she spent £1,179,482 for travel between Britain and the Continent over 15 years, and £45,777 for travel outside the EU.

During 10 years in Brussels, Lord Kinnock automatically received residential allowances totalling £276,962.

On Lord Kinnock’s income and perks, the spokeswoman said: “All of these details are a matter of public record.”

Based on Open Europe’s calculations, they will receive a combined annual pension of about £183,000.

According to the Mail on Sunday, the think-tank said Mrs Kinnock can expect £67,835 a year from two pensions as an MEP: one a £19,370 basic pension and the other £48,465 from the European Parliament’s Additional Voluntary Pension Scheme which sees the taxpayer paying £2 for every £1 put into the pot by MEPs.

Her new ministerial pay package will be used to top up contributions to the basic MEP pension. She already claims a teacher’s pension.

Lord Kinnock receives an ex-MP’s pension, thought to be £32,000 a year.

He has a second pension as a former EU Commissioner, worth more than £80,000.

The Kinnocks have also built up a valuable property portfolio, with homes in London and Wales.

In 1992, they bought a house in Ealing, West London, for £445,000. They sold it in January 2007 for £1,515,000 and bought a smart three-storey property.

Other members of the family have also benefited from Europe. Son Stephen’s first job after Cambridge University was as a research assistant to an MEP.

His Danish wife Helle – tipped as a future prime minister of Denmark – sat as an MEP from 1999 to 2004, while the Kinnocks’ daughter Rachel was her mother’s research assistant at the European Parliament."

Sauce For The Goose

by Les May

WHEN my wife got to sixty she got her State Retirement Pension (SRP). When I got to sixty I had to wait another five years until I was sixty five.   Some months before she reached retirement age my wife was contacted by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) telling her what to do. Her pension was paid immediately after her sixtieth birthday.  Some months before I reached sixty five I contacted the DWP to set things in motion.  My pension wasn’t paid immediately after my birthday.  In fact it was not paid until I had written to the DWP twice to ask why I had not received it.

You will perhaps understand that I am less than sympathetic to all the whingeing from some women that they were not properly made aware that the age at which they would receive their SRP was increasing.

Incidentally these changes affected men too.   As the age at which SRP was paid was raised the age for receiving concessionary fares, a.k.a The Bus Pass, tracked this.   Previous to this the age had been set at sixty in 2003, though men were still expected to continue working up to the age of sixty five.

Finally one woman has set the record straight.  Writing in the ‘i’ a lady by the name of Kate Roberts writes;

‘I can’t remember exactly when I found out that I would not be getting my state pension at the age of 60 in 2011, but it was well before the change was made.

I doubt that I was unique in that – if something on the news or in the papers may affect me, I take notice.  I rang the helpline number for a pension forecast, and was informed the changes were to be incremental.

The information was easily and freely available unless you lived in darkest Peru.  I do have sympathy for anyone who is struggling to carry on working, but I really don’t see how it can still be coming as a surprise.’

Kate Roberts is quite right.  The Pensions Act 1995 contained the following provisions:

Equalisation of pensionable age and of entitlement to certain benefits

Schedule 4 to this Act, of which —

(a) Part I has effect to equalise pensionable age for men and women progressively over a period of ten years beginning with 6th April 2010,

(b) Part II makes provision for bringing equality for men and women to certain pension and other benefits, and

(c) Part III makes consequential amendments of enactments,

shall have effect.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1995/26/part/II/enacted

Under the Pensions Act 2011, women's State Pension age will increase more quickly to 65 between April 2016 and November 2018.  From December 2018 the State Pension age for both men and women will start to increase to reach 66 by October 2020.

Whilst the 2011 act accelerates the rise in pensionable age for women so that the rise to sixty five is completed two years earlier it is difficult to see how anyone can complain that the rise has come as a surprise to them. 

******* 

More dodgy goings on at Ashton Jobcentre!

LAST week, we heard a complaint from a 19-year-old girl (Stacy) from Ashton, who had gone to Ashton-under-Lyne Jobcentre to accompany her friend (Rebecca) to an interview. Although her friend suffers from epilepsy and severe depression, she was told she would not be allowed to attend  the interview to support her friend also aged 19. 

We understand that the Jobcentre told Stacy that it was impossible for her to attend the interview because it would breach 'confidentiality'.  Consequently, Stacy had to wait outside the building for just under an hour, while her friend was interviewed. 

We often hear complaints from people at Ashton Jobcentre that they have been refused permission by Jobcentre staff to accompany a friend to an interview.  This frequently occurs even when the DWP client is suffering, like Rebecca, from health/mental health issues.  Yet, guidance to staff working for the Department of Work & Pensions (DWP), make it clear that: 

'Claimants accessing DWP benefits and services can have someone to accompany them to act on their behalf.'  And, 'Claimants can have a variety of people accompany them such as Representatives, Appointees, Corporate acting bodies or Personal acting bodies.'

As this sort of thing is happening on a regular basis at Ashton Jobcentre, the issue needs to be raised with the DWP and the local MP, Angela Rayner.

Page-Views on the NV BLOG?

SINCE we last published a review of the page-views on the Northern Voices' BLOG in December 2014, we have had almost a four-fold increase in the number of viewings.  Last month, the total page-views were virtually double our best ever total for any other month. 
It is clear that the posts from Chris Draper on the goings on at Freedom Press is having some impact on the figures.  Posting by Chris entitled PENSIONER ATTACKED at ANARCHIST HQ! and   A Year in the Death of FREEDOM  are scoring quite well.   Other posts doing well are: 

The Hegemony of Horrible Hugs: about Simon Danczuk the Rochdale MP and his relations with
the Tory Party and the review by Blanco Posnet entitled Confessions of an NHS whistle-blower! about the book 'The Black Necked Swans' by Milton Peña Vásquez the Chilean surgeon at Tameside Hospital, are also scoring good hits.

  

Argos, Bridgewater: 4-day Pensions Strike Starts

To all Bridgwater/Highbridge/mid-Somerset Trades Unionists:
Friends,
'An injury to one is an injury to all!'
Today Wednesday, was the first of a four-day strike by hundreds of Unite Bridgwater ARGOS warehouse workers. The protest strike concerns a vicious attack on workers' pensions, similar to that perpetrated by Uniliver at their factories, including Walls Ice Cream at Gloucester, earlier in the year.I attended the Unite picket line today on behalf of the Bridgwater Trades Union Council. Support for the strike, which also includes four other ARGOS distribution depots, was excellent, with very few crossing the twenty-strong picket/members support line.
Wincanton PLC drivers who work at ARGOS have been subject to threatening letters, should they stop their lorries on the picket line let alone refuse to cross. Solidarity is therefore important. Local trades unionists are welcome at Huntworth-off the M5 slip road-any time during tomorrow/Thursday, Friday, and Sunday. (The depot closes on Saturdays)
The picket-line UNITE reps include Andy, Steve and Chris, together with local full-time officer Dorothy Fogg. Dorothy can be contacted for further information via the Taunton UNITE office on 01823 442464. Please try and find time to make that solidarity visit!  If you can't make either the picket line or the store leaflet, you can send an E-mail message of support to me (or directly to Dorothy or Laurence above) and I will pass it on.
*******************************************************************
Bridgwater Trades Council, including UNITE delegates will be showing solidarity with the ARGOS strikers by leafletting the ARGOS store at the Clink, Eastover (opposite McDonalds) during this strike.  Times when we propose to leaflet ARGOS shoppers are EITHER Friday 4pm to 5.30pm; Saturday 10am till 11.30am, or Sunday 10.30am till 12pm. Please let me know urgently-and no later than Thursday 10pm- which times suit you. If you can only leaflet for 30 minutes, that's fine, but do try and take part. I will let you know which day and time has been chosen.
Dave Chapple, Secretary, Bridgwater Trades Union Council:  Tel. 01278 450562 (answer phone)