Thursday, 12 April 2018

How Spain can teach us a thing or two

Zak Garner-Purkis, news editor, Construction News - 12th, April 2018.
SPAINs construction sector was one of the hardest hit in Europe when global recession struck a decade ago.

Fuelled by cheap debt in the noughties, municipalities across the country had embarked on huge developments, until the financial rug was suddenly pulled from under their feet.
But amid the chaos and confusion of the financial crash, something very significant happened to the Spanish construction market in the form of a new law on subcontractors.
The Spanish government introduced measures to limit the number of subcontractors working a project to three, not including the main contractor.
Work could be subcontracted to self-employed workers, but self-employed workers were not able to subcontract.
The law also banned the use of subcontractors whose main task was the provision of labour, effectively removing employment agencies from Spain’s construction sector.
One of the main drivers behind this pretty stringent regulation was safety.
Prior to its introduction, Spain had been responsible for 20 per cent of all workplace accidents in the EU.
The new rules insisted companies within the supply chain be registered, with registration dependent on carrying out health and safety training.
In that regard it was successful, with Spain now ranking amongst Europe’s safest nations to work.
The change in the law a decade ago also aimed to tackle insolvencies in the sector, the results of which are harder to gauge. 
The economic difficulties of the past decade make it hard to say whether the legislation led to fewer firms going bust, or if it was just because the sector had shrunk so dramatically.
The real question though is: could such rules on subcontractors work in Britain?
Well, the UK market is certainly not in as dire a place as the Spanish market was when the last recession began to take hold, but the theory is an interesting one.
On paper, the biggest loser under such a system in the UK would be main contractors: deprived of a large supply chain, tier ones would either have to bring expertise in house or downsize the way they manage projects.
This could be a beneficial trend. If large projects were broken up into smaller, cheaper lots, the market could open up to lots of smaller contractors who could compete on price.
Labour could be sourced locally, and there would be a clear benefit to training in-house labour.
Maybe that’s imagining it in an overly optimistic way. But it’s definitely a model worth considering.
******
 

Wednesday, 11 April 2018

NOAM CHOMSKY & ANTIFA

Back in 2010 Noam Chomsky discussed the parallels between the Tea-Party and the pre-Nazi period in Germany.  Chomsky noted that after the Weimar Republic failed to handle the nation's economic woes, mainstream political parties lost support and the Nazis emerged.  Chomsky warned that the Left would need to take this as a sign that much better organizing was in order to combat the likes of the Tea-Party.  Mocking and threatening the far-right group to Chomsky served no real purpose and was a severe error in principle, tactics, and philosophy.

Chomsky added that, “If somebody comes along who is charismatic and honest this country is in real trouble because of the frustration, disillusionment, the justified anger and the absence of any coherent response.”

Don’t get me wrong, many of my friends on the Left admire Antifa’s resistance of neo-Nazis.  And like me they express deep concerns about our persistently fascist leaning country that has devolved in terms of climate, the economy, as well as a variety of social issues.  I am not however, a “soft-fascist,” or “typical liberal,” for supporting Chomsky’s views.  Nor are Chomsky critics all members of a Stalinist cult because they may support Antifa through and through.

Believe me, I’d love to punch Nazis and you can count me in to be an eternal member of resistance to both fringe and mainstream hate, but I’m not sure it would yield any positive result to use my progressive thought as a literal battering ram.  Despite the horrors of this nation’s past and present on so many issues, resorting to violence against a group that thrives on violence seems counterproductive.

Could it be that Chomsky is wrong and his detractors are right?  Could it be that there’s no time for supplicant MLK type resolve in 2017?  I think the broader Left has history on their side.

President Trump made dangerous and inaccurate remarks concerning the “many sides” of Charlottesville.  At the same time, Chomsky correctly asserted that Antifa’s actions served as “a major gift to the Right, including the militant Right, who [are] exuberant.”

He asserted that Antifa "generally [proves] self-destructive."  Furthermore, Chomsky remarked that Antifa indicates “a minuscule fringe of the Left,” and that "[W]hat they do is often wrong in principle — like blocking talks."

This positioning is very consistent with most of his career.  After taking off as a world-renowned linguist Chomsky first gained prominence as a political writer during the Vietnam Era and one of his main sources of inspiration was the famed revolutionary pacifist A.J. Muste.

Muste is famous for articulating,  “There is no way to peace for peace is the way. Peace is the starting place, and you can not end with it if you do not begin with it.”  This helps to explain why Chomsky says that the "toughest and most brutal" always win, which are of course the white supremacists, militarized police forces, government forces, and fascists.

When Chomsky recognizes that there are “opportunity costs [and a] loss of the opportunity for education, organizing, and serious and constructive activism,” it doesn’t mean he is a pure pacifist either.  He holds that force is only an option after you fully exhaust peaceful means, and one must try every peaceable mean.  Any use of violence on the Left must follow this trajectory since violence in combatting fascist elements and their support networks require massive organizing efforts and highly trained insurgency techniques.  At the moment however Chomsky holds that Antifa is not even remotely related to anarchism.

He is not mistaken to ask Antifa to think through their actions along with the consequences.  This does not equate to showing any patience for the racist right. Chris Hedges, who took even more heat for his commentary, is simply asking for the same amount of introspection regarding tactics.
Tony DiMaggio has managed to stay out of the Left’s crosshairs unlike Chomsky and Hedges, but I believe he too is correct in his assertions.  DiMaggio knows that violence is a part of the real world but remarks that “violence is never something one should actively seek out.”

Fascists, neo-Nazis and right wing terrorists do indeed try to fuse first amendment assembly rights of know-nothings to justifications for violence.  In many ways the mainstream Alt-Right acts much like ISIS, another by-product of failed policies.  Of course, the Left and Antifa is not the same as the Alt-Right, for there is no such thing as an “Alt-Left.”  But this is however precisely why it’s harmful to entertain violence and the fascist playbook. Similar to Osama bin Laden wanting Bush 43 to engage in a crusade, the Alt-Right wants the Left in a violent war to destroy constructive engagement within the Left internally.

Todd Gitlin is correct when he asserts that, “In truth, there is no symmetry between the “alt-right” and “antifa.”  Antifa is the backlash to the backlash, a defensive response to the growing presence of right-wing extremism.”  Gitlin goes on to add however that, “many antifa activists do not think strategically about whom they alienate.”

John Halle is another person who took principled positions on Antifa. He agrees with the politics of the Left but sees a problem with tactics.  Halle simply states that violence, for instance on a university campus in the protest of a speaker, has boiled over when a moderator is assaulted and sustains injuries.
Chomsky told me that although he received some support for his comments on Antifa, he mostly received furious opposition.  Anarchism is of course not some vague, ill-organized and unclassifiable group like Antifa demonstrated.  Chomsky stated that Antifa might be operating on a romanticized vision of muscularity.  It’s certainly possible.
******

Sunday, 8 April 2018

Partisan Venue Denied Donation

Cavalier attitude by Manchester Anarchists to trade unionists
by Barry Woodling



I have to inform readers that a resolution requesting a  substantial grant of £1,000 from Unite the Union was not passed at a recent meeting of the Manchester Unite Area Activists in February after issues were raised concerning the events at the Manchester Anarchist Book fair on the 2nd, December 2017.  A meeting requested on the blacklist by Tameside TUC was turned down and 2 anti blacklist campaigners were forcibly ejected from the building. This meeting was hosted by the Partisan Collective who have a duty of care to its users.   

I am still awaiting a reply to my numerous e-mails asking for a proper investigation of the shocking events at that book fair which have studiously been ignored.   It is a serious matter when members of a trade union are denied access to a public event.   I sincerely hope that in the name of natural justice I am least given the courtesy of a reply.

****** 

Barry Woodling on Liverpool Anarchist Bookfair

'I attended the LIverpool  Anarchist book fair and on entering the building my path was blocked by one of the organisers who informed me that I was banned.  The matter was resolved when another organiser quickly appeared on the scene and said I wasn't on the blacklist.  These shenanigans reminiscent of what has happened over the years at the Manchester Anarchist Book fair are destroying whatever credibility the British anarchist movement had left.   Proscriptions, bans and expulsions under the guise of "safer spaces" are a travesty of any democratic norms and natural justice.   They must be resolutely challenged!'

******

Thursday, 5 April 2018

Public inquiry says Mark Cassidy was police spy

Undercover police officer HN15 = Mark Cassidy = Mark Jenner 

THE undercover policing public inquiry has finally confirmed that the joiner many of us knew as Mark Cassidy was in truth an undercover police officer.  His real name is Mark Jenner and 
between 1995-2000, he infiltrated the construction UCATT (his subs were paid from a bank account set up by Special Branch) 

He also infiltrated rank and file groups including the Building Worker Safety Campaign, the meetings of which he chaired at the Colin Roach Centre in Hackney. Jenner / Cassidy also targeted RMT, Unison, CPSA, TGWU and was on numerous picketlines including Dahl Jenson at Waterloo, JJ Fastfoods at Tottenham Hale and L.B. Southwark DLO.

Mark Cassidy / Jenner was first publicly named in by an article by journalist & union activist Mark Metcalf and in Blacklisted book by Phil Chamberlain & Dave Smith.  The Met Police issued a public apology to 'Alison', the activist he lived with during the five years of his deployment. It is shameful that the Met and the public inquiry have taken so long to admit that Mark Cassidy was an undercover police officer from the Special Demonstration Squad, something that everyone has known for years.  

'Alison', Mark Metcalf, UCATT (now part of UNITE) and blacklisted workers Brian Higgins, John Jones, Steve Hedley, Frank Smith, Dan Gilman & Dave Smith (who attended meetings, protests and pickets with Mark Cassidy / Jenner) have all been granted core participant status in the undercover police public inquiry. 

This public confirmation about Mark Cassidy comes just a week after the Met confirmed that police provided information to the building industry blacklist. 


Blacklist Support Group send a huge hug to 'Alison' and all the women activist at Police Spies Out of Lives for their inspirational battle to force the authorities to tell the truth about the undercover police officers that abused them.



Full story on Mark Jenner: http://powerbase.info/index.php/Mark_Jenner


Jack Stevenson Obituary

by Donald Rooum 
JACK Stevenson died on Easter Sunday.  

An electrician by trade, and a keen gardener of vegetables on his allotment, Jack was prominent among London anarchists and in the 1960s.  Among other achievements, he was the founder, treasurer, and inconspicuous donor to the Sit-Down-Or-Pay-Up fund.  Which subsidised legal expenses and fines of supporters of the Committee of One Hundred anti-bomb campaign, mostly charged with obstructing traffic.
****** 
 
The Jack Stevenson I knew!

by Brian Bamford 

 I first attended a meeting of the London Anarchist Group in November 1961, and that’s when I first heard Jack Stevenson speak at a meeting.  Laurens Otter was there, and I’d already known Laurens for over a year, through my acquaintance with him on the Coast-to- Coast March against nuclear weapons up North, and at other meetings and conferences associated with Ban the Bomb and the Labour Party.  During the London Anarchist meeting, as I recall, there was a disagreement between Jack and Laurens over the the latter’s willingness to court imprisonment and submit passively to the authorities during his campaign with the Direct Action Committee at Holy Lock.


Jack, as I recall, asked Laurens why he and the others imprisoned for the offences in Scotland hadn’t attempted to escape, as that, according to Jack, would have been the anarchist thing to do. Laurens said at the time that they had been asked to give their word that they would not attempt to escape, but they had refused to do so.


Both Jack and his wife, Mary, were close to the anarcho-syndicalist wing of anarchism. Consequently, Jack was among that group of anarchists and syndicalists who in late 1960 wrote a letter to Freedom calling for a conference of Rank & File workers*.  Among those promoting this conference were such figures as Peter Turner, a carpenter and later one of the editorial staff of Freedom; Brian Behan, also a carpenter; Ken Weller, a shop steward in the car industry and member of a group, initially known as Socialism Reaffirmed, which published a journal, The Agitator; Ken Hawkes the national secretary of the Syndicalist Workers Federation (SWF); Bill and Joan Christopher (see ‘A Radical Born on Bastille Day'); and of course the electrician, Jack Stevenson.


I spoke to Joan Christopher about the death of Jack Stevenson last night, and we remembered that when I interviewed her a year ago that we had reminisced about her and Bill’s friendship with Jack and Mary Stevenson. How they disagreed about how Bill and Jack Stevenson had had so many disputes over their tastes in Jazz. Peter Turner, who witnessed these disputes was always going on to me about these disagreements over music.


Joan had said ‘we all had a passion for Jazz! But when were living at Cumberland Road, we made it open-plan, and on Jack Stevenson’s advice bought a Pye Black Box. We liked Bruck, Mendelssohn, Mahler and Oscar Peterson.’ The Joan said: ‘It was through Jack Stevenson we came to know the track by Jack Teagarden called “Tribute to Sydney Bechet”.’

At that point Joan started to hum the tune, and she said movingly: ‘I want that played at my funeral’. 

Strangely enough the last time I saw Jack and Mary Stevenson was at Peter Turner's funeral in London, and Laurens Otter was there as well.

*  The National Rank & File Group (NR&FM) of militants had some effect in the early 1960s.   In 1961, Peregrine Gerard Worsthorne was to be appointed as the first deputy editor of The Sunday Telegraph; a job with fewer responsibilities than its title implies, and he rang Jim Pinkerton, then the international secretary of the Syndicalist Workers Federation, to ask about the National Rank & File grouping.  It was in his column in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Worsthorne gave some critical coverage to the NR&FM entity at the time.  Years later, Peter Turner told me that with the dramatic rise in the 1960s of the anti-nuclear Ban-the-Bomb movement around CND and the Committee of 100, the industrial struggle was sidelined and the Nat. Rank & File groping of militant was absorbed into the C. of 100.
. 
******
 

CALL TO FIND DEAD MAN'S RELATIVES

DAVID Alan Snowden, 60, died on Tuesday the 27th, March, in his front room on Kingsland Road,  Castleton in Rochdale, Lancs.  Neighbours who broke-in found him lying on his couch last Thursday after noticing smells. His fire was still switched on which may explain the prevailing smell.  There are no suspicious circumstances relating to his death.

David Snowden, who worked in the stone masonry trade as a polisher, lived alone and had been an enthusiast participating in stock racing and enjoyed tinkering with motor vehicles.  Neighbours say he lived a quiet life since his mum and dad died some years ago..

Police are now appealing to the public to help trace his next-of-kin.  According to neighbours his only recent contact with relatives had been at funerals.  It is thought that he may have family living down South.

Anyone with information about David or his family is asked to contact the Police Coroner’s Office on 0161 856 8497.
******

Today Thursday it has been reported that a member of David's family has contacted the police.

******

Wednesday, 4 April 2018

Decide For Yourself

by Les May

YOU can find an image of the mural which has been denounced as ‘anti-Semitic’ by people attacking Corbyn at:


If you click on it you will get an enlarged image. Right click on that and you will get a menu which includes ‘Save Image As’.  Find that file and click on it to load it into an image viewer. You will then be able to decide for yourself whether it really is ‘anti-Semitic’ or just a well executed piece of art which you are free to interpret as you wish.

As the ‘white on black’ font of the website is hard to read I have converted it to ‘black on white’ and appended it below. I hope the author does not mind.

How does a piece of public art lead to the possible downfall of one of 's most senior statesmen?  It sounds like a riddle and I'm sure it would baffle anybody just twenty years ago, but not in this current Orwellian age.  Literally just days after being accused of being a Russian agent, Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the Labour Party and Her Majesty's Opposition, has been denounced as an anti-Semite. 

Being labelled an anti-Semite is incredibly easy these days if you're a UFO and ghost-believing tin foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist like me, but it is still quite rare inside the pen of Corbyn's ideological community.  The mural was put up in 2012 by the artist Kalen Ockerman, better known as 'Mear One', see: http://mearone.com/. 

It was called Freedom for Humanity and was painted on a wall in the heart of 's .  It depicts a row of six elderly suited men sitting round a table which is covered by a board game that resembles Monopoly.  The table has no legs and its top is supported on the backs of four naked and faceless seated human figures who are bent over completely.  Behind them are a pile of loose cogs from a machine.  In the background is a pair of smoking factory chimneys next to two objects that are either volcanoes or cooling towers from a power station.  There is a network of lines behind them that look like chemtrails in the sky.  On the left is a man carrying a placard in his right hand that says: 
'The New World Order is the enemy of humanity.'  His left hand is held aloft in a fist.   On the right is a tired and sad-looking mother holding her baby. Above the scene is a rising sun framing a pyramid with a detached capstone containing the Eye of Providence.   I think it is a magnificent artwork and deserves to be ranked among the great examples of political graffiti across the world, like those ingenious pieces from and .  It must have been a striking experience to walk down the street and see it. I was planning to take a trip to the location and film it for HPANWO TV while it was still there.   Then I looked into the matter and I found out that it had already been obliterated in 2012, just three weeks after it had been finished.  The borough council ordered the destruction of the painting on the grounds that it was 'anti-Semitic!'   Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-19844681/kalen-ockerman-mural-to-be-removed-from-brick-lane.

The problem that has arisen today comes from all those years ago. Jeremy Corbyn originally spoke out against the removal of Freedom for Humanity.  He told the artist he was "in good company" and compared the removal of the painting to the famous Man at the Crossroads fresco in that was whitewashed by the Rockefellers for its Marxist iconography (It was happily recreated in at a later date).  There is absolutely no suggestion at all that the six antagonistic figures in the painting were Jews.  The artist himself denied it and the man on whose wall the mural was painted, a restaurant manager of Bangladeshi origin, said that two of the figures looked Indian, see source link above.  The allegation is that the faces of the six evil men included generic Jewish features of the kind seen in propaganda from Nazi Germany.  I don't see that myself; the faces are all very different.  Two of them, the one of the far right and the one third from the left, look like old photographs of British colonial officials from the days of the Empire.  The one on the far left has a full beard that is more typically Russian.  The problem with the painting is most likely its conspiracy theoretical element.  As I say in the background links below, there is a paranoid hypersensitivity when it comes to linking conspiracy theory of any kind to hatred of Jews.  This serves a purpose for the people behind the conspiracy because it means their enemies are hampered by social degradation and marginalization.  Therefore the conspirators eagerly encourage this public hysteria.  However, in the background links I explain why it is, in the vast majority of cases, a false premise.  The New World Order is caused by the Illuminati, not the Jews.  I can't put it any simpler than that; there are no qualifiers to that statement. Corbyn was first pulled up by a Jewish MP, Luciana Berger, on Twitter (where else?). 

Corbyn backed down and about-turned. He said that Freedom for Humanity was 'deeply disturbing' and he now 'wholeheartedly supported its removal'.   He went on:  
'I sincerely regret that I did not look more closely at the image I was commenting on, the contents of which are deeply disturbing and anti-Semitic.'

As I've explained, the content of the mural is not anti-Semitic and there is information available to explain why that is in detail which I have produced myself. Corbyn should have known better than to believe that a grovelling public apology would save him from the standard and predictable hashtag barrage.  It would have been better to stand his ground and fight the anti-Semitism premise altogether.  If Mr Corbyn had approached me I would have coached him in this matter. The media lynch mob is currently in full swing;  the torches and pitchforks are being passed round. Jewish welfare groups under the influence of the Israeli lobby have taken the bait hook, line and sinker.  Corbyn is desperately trying to placate them, in vain.  As I said, it's an exercise in futility.  

This is just the latest in a series of attempts to discredit the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn by his Blairite opponents within the Labour Party.  See here for details of the previous flare-up: https://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/is-ken-livingstone-nazi.html.  The only real anti-Semitism in the Labour Party comes from the radicalized Muslims that the government have been breeding for the last few decades through their sponsorship of Saudi-run mega-mosques and their agents posing at popular media hate-preachers, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/anjem-choudary-arrest-blocked-by-mi5.html. 

Corbyn is actually very similar to Donald Trump.  He would be deeply offended at my comparison, but I think it's accurate.  He is a man in a political office whom the does not want in that role.  They worked hard to keep him out of it.  They have since wavered between trying to remove him and trying to manage the situation with him remaining as leader.  Whenever the latter fails they try the former.  Corbyn's career prospects are not looking rosy.   A part of me thinks this is probably for the best; not because of Corbyn himself but because of the second echelon of Labour officials behind him, a posse of total blackguards who are currently trying to ride in his slipstream to their own positions of power.  If Corbyn becomes Prime Minister then it will only be for a few months before there is an et tu Brutus situation and then he'll be lying in the back benches with Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Diane Abbott's knives his back.  At the same time, anything that the real 'Evil Six!' from the painting do not want gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.  Thankfully the Jewish voice of reason has not gone silent in its hour of need. Jenny Manson of the Jewish Voice for Labour defended Corbyn and marvelled at the ingenuity of the media for smearing 'the most passionate anti-racist campaigner of the last forty years' as 'pro-racist and anti-Semitic.'  

 Source: https://evolvepolitics.com/the-jewish-voice-twitter-account-is-absolutely-destroying-the-medias-latest-corbyn-anti-semitism-smear-tweets/. I take my hat off to these people; they face abuse from other Jews for their stances. They were there for David Icke when he was in this position and I'm glad they are here again.

Your Building Society ???


by Christopher Draper

BUILDING societies, like most good things, were invented in the North.

Founded by workers as mutual aid organisations, building societies provided a safe home for meagre savings so that in the long term members could secure homes for themselves and their families.  Over the decades the money men and city spivs moved in, privatised many societies and subverted democratic control of the rest.  You won’t see many millionaire money men walking the streets of Bradford these days but you’ll find a fair few if you pop into the Boardroom of the Yorkshire Building Society (YBS), a mutual aid for the wealthy.

Hell and Halifax
YBS isn’t the only example of the hollowing-out of the mutualist ideas and working class ideals of the original building societies.  The capitalist feeding frenzy that privatised the ‘Halifax Building Society’ (then Britain’s biggest) and then almost destroyed it shows YBS and other remaining ‘mutuals’ have further to fall from their idealistic origins.  A comprehensive analysis of every surviving mutual would be onerous to compile and boring to read so I’ll concentrate on contrasting the professed ideals of YBS with the actualite but the critique applies across the board.

'Our Society'
YBS ‘members’ who legally own the ‘society’ nowadays play no greater role in the business than they do in MacDonalds, Google, Asda or any other retailer yet YBS, like the other fake mutuals, constantly claims we do. ‘Our Society a Place Where We Belong', “Members…at the heart of everything we do’, ‘As a building society we are set up specifically to help people rather than make money from them’.  In the last few years YBS wasted millions of pounds of members’ savings settling fines and compensation claims imposed as a consequence of negligent and cynical trading practices. 

The Financial Conduct Authority discovered YBS indulged in mis-selling PPI; YBS neglected and improperly overcharged mortgage customers experiencing repayment difficulties and YBS promoted and sold bonds that promised financial returns that were virtually impossible to achieve.

Even a cursory examination of YBS documents reveals a focus on growth and expansion rather than member involvement. The truth is that bigger businesses bring bigger bonuses for bosses and for Mike Regnier, YBS CEO, this year’s bonus added a further £275,000 to his already massive salary. A YBS survey of “customer experience” over an identical period recorded a drop from 27th to 87th place (comparable organisations) yet had no negative impact on Mike’s bonus.

Once Upon a Time in Huddersfield
YBS started in the nineteenth century with the creation of 'The Huddersfield Equitable Permanent Benefit Building Society' by a handful of workers and tradesmen in a small building on the corner of King Street and Queen Street. In the twentieth century the 'Huddersfield' amalgamated with Dewsbury’s 'West Yorkshire' and then Bradford’s 'Self Help' to, in 1982, form the 'YBS'. 
 
From its foundation in 1864 until 1896 none of the Directors of the ‘Huddersfield’ drew any salary from the Society’s funds now the YBS Director’s trough is lavishly swilled with members’ savings.

The YBS Board comprises 9 directors and includes 6 non-executive directors. In 2017, the executive directors received a total remuneration of two million and fifty-six thousand pounds with CEO Mike Regnier alone getting almost a million (£930,000). As the average local wage is £20,929, Mike gets more every year than a Bradford worker would earn in a lifetime!

Keeping Members Informed
You’ve doubtless received one of those booklets that building societies send out to members as an annual report.  The first thing to note is that these documents are not actually ‘Annual Reports’ but selective, propaganda pamphlets that Directors employ to bamboozle members into thinking they’re involved.  For YBS the official 2017 ‘Annual Report’ is double the page size (A4 rather than A5) and six times the length of the ‘Annual Review’ sent out to members.  Both documents are essentially sales brochures boasting of how brilliantly the ‘business’ is being run but occasionally key details can be gleaned from the full document omitted from the dumbed-down version.   This year (2017/18) the YBS members’ pamphlet made no mention of the gender pay gap that all big organisations are legally obliged to publicly report but tucked away at the foot of the inner column of the ‘full’ document on page 71 we find that YBS operates a 31% gender pay gap but of course even here there’s no admission of guilt rather a statement of pious bullshit, ‘The Group strives to create an environment where diversity in all forms is encouraged and barriers in the way of colleagues fulfilling their potential are removed.’

The full 190 page Report includes lovely full-page, full-colour pictures of Chairman John (Uriah) Heaps and CEO Mike Regnier yet still doesn’t fully report YBS’s legally required analysis of its gender pay-gap (it’s available online).  This records women are very much in the minority among its highest paid employees (top quartile: 42% women/58% men) whilst down at the bottom end (quartile) the lowest paid YBS employees are overwhelmingly female (80% women/20% men).  In place of these facts the Report obfuscates:
‘In simple terms there are more females occupying less senior roles. It is this imbalance that results in the gender pay gap’.

YBS Democracy
Like all fake democracies YBS have the problem of manufacturing consent.  Pictures of people of all types and colour are an essential ingredient of all YBS booklets, sites and propaganda accompanied by slogans asserting ‘inclusivity’.   The aim is to make members think everyone else is involved and if you’re not it’s your lazy fault.  The truth is that YBS is as mutual as the Co-op is cooperative, it’s been captured and run by money men with no radical, socialist or even cooperative agenda.  Any claims to mutualism are utterly superficial.

In 1864, there was a plumber amongst the originators of the Huddersfield Building Society but you won’t find a ‘butcher, baker or candlestick maker’ amongst the directors now, most come from the banking world with a leavening of hotels, pubs and gambling directorships.

Directors know few members turn up at the AGM and there’s little likelihood they’ll be challenged.  Even if they were the Chairman wields thousands of proxy votes from members who returned their voting paper in response to whatever gimmicky inducement YBS offers that particular year (in 2018 it’s a donation to charity).  Few notice or understand the import of the inconspicuous phrase, ‘The Chairman will be your proxy unless you choose someone else by completing the box on the back of this form’.  Although almost fifteen thousand members voted against last years lavish directors’ emoluments with a further three thousand withholding their agreement the Chairman claimed the backing of 128,159 proxies as authorisation for the Board to stuff their wallets.  Business as usual and triples all round, Cheers!

Some more Equitable than Others
In 1864, the Huddersfield Equitable offered members the prospect of a home and interest on their savings of 5% interest (at a time that inflation was zero).  In 2018 Chairman Heaps claims YBS 'are proud of our 150 year commitment to our mutual values – delivering long term value' but consider what has been delivered by Heaps and his fellow buildings society money men.  'Our mortgage customers face average house prices that are almost eight times average earnings – an all-time high…By 2020 only a quarter of 30-year olds will own their own home, in contrast, more than half the generation currently approaching retirement were homeowners by their thirtieth birthday.'   Whilst consumer price inflation is running at around 3% per annum YBS savers are offered only 0.85% so even labelling them 'savings accounts' smacks of 'mis-selling'.
 
Branch closures reduce the service to members, increase centralisation and bring banks bad publicity but YBS is equally guilty with 48 branches closed last year with a further 18 closures already planned for 2018.

Progress?
YBS isn’t doing anything illegal and is typical of the building society sector and that’s precisely the problem, the rot is endemic.  What started as local mutual-aid societies founded by workers and tradesmen to shelter themselves and their families from the ravages of the marketplace have been gradually infiltrated by the values and personnel of commercialism.  Poorly paid, largely female, workers are welcomed at YBS to do the donkey work at the counters and computers but money-men run the show on classic capitalist lines. 

In 1994 YBS was the first building society to operate its own share-dealing service (subsequently sold) and members were encouraged to redirect their mutual saving into stock market speculation.

In 2018, as ordinary YBS members suffer miserable, below inflation, returns on their savings there’s rich pickings for the boys in the boardroom.  The members 'Annual Review' prominently boasts of £1.5m'contributed to our local communities' but fails to mention that this is less than the amount 'contributed' to board members Mike Regnier and Stephen White.

Re-building Society
The nineteenth century working class created a rich variety of mutual aid organisations, Building Societies, Benefit Societies, Trade Unions, Political Parties, Burial Clubs, Reading Rooms and much more.  Like YBS, most are now ideologically moribund zombies with some appearance of the original but devoid of humanity and political idealism.  The causes are complex but in almost every case a tendency to apathy and materialism amongst workers was exploited by lawyers and city slickers to gain control and extract value.  Hierarchies and huge pay differentials replaced equitable ideals and egalitarian practice. 
 
There’s no quick solution but we can all do a bit to reclaim our moribund organisations.  If you’re a building society member don’t ever return the paper giving the Chairman your vote, either tick all the 'against' or 'vote withheld' boxes. 
 
It’s optimistic to dream of reversing the decline in building societies and similar mutual aid organisations but we can at least try to stop the rot.  Recognise the rips-offs and speak out, don’t be complicit, expose the injustice and ridicule the rapacious.  Even YBS is not entirely immune to activism, every creative act of protest supports, encourages and incites others – You’d Be Surprised…

Sunday, 1 April 2018

Faking the News on Facebook?

By Les May

IN the distant days of my youth my two primary modes of entertainment were listening to the radio and reading books from Rochdale library.  The former gave me a liking for the music of Django Reinhardt plus a detailed knowledge of the deeds, and misdeeds, of the Forsyte family.   The latter gave me memorable book titles like ‘Winston Churchill’s Toyshop’ and accounts of the doings of characters like Sefton Delmer.

As soon as I heard of the appearance of anti-Semitic messages on Facebook pages set up by supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, I thought of Delmer, or at least of his spiritual heirs.


In the autumn of 1940, Delmer was recruited by the Political Warfare Executive (PWE) to organize radio broadcasts to Nazi Germany.   The twist in the story was that the broadcasts would undermine Hitler by pretending to originate from fervent Nazi supporters complaining about the way that he was being let down by his underlings.  Pretending to be something you are not and using that as a disguise to undermine your opponent, was Delmer’s forte.

A modern day Sefton Delmer would not need anything so crude or expensive as a 600kW medium wave transmitter to spread discord. In fact his intended victims would open the door and welcome him in by making him a Facebook ‘friend’ without for one moment knowing who he is.  Once ‘inside’ what is easier than to post anti-Semitic messages to discredit not just Corbyn, but all Corbyn supporters.

If this sounds a little far fetched check out these websites all of which offer ‘aged’ Facebook accounts to anyone with the cash to buy.


Whenever Israel and the Palestinians decide to have a go at each other the war isn’t just fought with guns and bullets and the PBI, it’s also fought on social media like Facebook and Twitter, by each side’s cyber-soldiers.  In time we shall no doubt find out whether Russia really did influence the outcome of the Brexit referendum and/or the US presidential election by similar means.

Labour’s superior ability in using social media to get its message across has been been credited with helping to dramatically slash the Tory’s majority at the last election.  Now it is learning that there is no such thing as a free lunch.  Your opponents can play dirty, and they may just be doing it.    

Anyone for ‘snail mail’?
******


Saturday, 31 March 2018

A Man Righteous Among the Nations

By Les May

YOU have probably never heard of Dutch schoolteacher Johan van Hulst.  I certainly had not until I read an obituary of him in the Washington Post.  Along with two colleagues he is credited with saving the lives of some 600 Jewish children who would otherwise have been sent to the death camps.  All this under the nose of the SS and knowing that if he were found out he too would be killed. That is what anti-Semitism really means.   It is part of the experience of many of our continental neighbours whose countries were occupied by the Nazis.  It is not part of our experience and it puts the ‘anti-Semitism’, which some would have us believe is rampant in the Labour party, into some kind of perspective. It also gives the lie to those people who claim the ‘The Holocaust’ was a hoax.

Both Stalin and Hitler despised Jewish people because they did not have a state of their own. Stalin deported them, Hitler murdered them.  With a history like this it is unsurprising that anyone who self identifies as Jewish will feel a close affinity with the state of Israel, the one country that is not going to deport them or murder them.

But identifying with a country is a two edged sword. It thrusts upon you a moral responsibility for that country’s actions.  On 17 March 2003 the late Robin Cook received a standing ovation from the House of Commons for his resignation speech after leaving the Cabinet in protest at the Iraq war.  Thousands of people took to the streets to voice their objections to the war.  They were people who wanted to tell Blair, and the world, ‘you do not go to war in my name’.

So the distinction between gratuitous anti-semitism and thought through anti-Zionism may begin to look a bit hazy at times.   Nonetheless the distinction is real.  Gratuitous anti-semitism on social media should not be made an excuse for not questioning the policies of the state of Israel, either by individuals or the press.   Nor should it be made an excuse for the press seeking to interfere in the internal structures of the Labour party.

It cannot have escaped notice that if Corbyn accedes to the demand that Christine Shawcroft should be suspended from the party and removed from the party’s ruling national executive committee (NEC), it will shift the balance of power between the pro- and anti-Corbyn forces.  So whilst it is not difficult to find a few dozen examples of gratuitous anti-Semitism coming from some members of the Labour party, it is also a story being whipped up mostly by MPs who have always objected to Corbyn leading the party and a press which thinks the same.

How many of the people who are so vocal about this would be willing to act like Johan van Hulst did?

Thursday, 29 March 2018

On Roger-the-Dodger's Official Website

ROGER Pearce, the former editor of Freedom the anarchist newspaper, has degrees in Theology from Durham University and Law from London University.   He is also a barrister-at-law. Married with three adult children, he has homes in London and Miami and, until 2012, was European Security Director of a high profile global company.

The former Commander of Special Branch at New Scotland Yard, Roger Pearce was responsible for surveillance and undercover operations against terrorists and extremists, the close protection of government ministers and visiting VIPs, and other highly sensitive assignments.

He was also Director of Intelligence, charged with heading covert operations against serious and organised criminals.

After leaving the Yard he was appointed Counter-Terrorism Adviser to the Foreign Office, where he worked with government and intelligence experts worldwide in the campaign against Al Qaeda.

In Agent of the State, The Extremist, Javelin and future titles the author draws upon his knowledge and first hand experience of a career in national security at every level.

Roger's novels have been translated into Dutch under the titles Explosief and Extremist by Luitingh and Russian by Centrepolygraph.
******

Monday, 26 March 2018

Councillors who Snuggled-up to a Super Stipend

Editor Northern Voices:  ON Monday the 19 March 2018 the 
Rochdale Online website reported that in Rochdale the 
Councillor's allowances will 'top one million' pounds.
Helpfully, Carl Faulkner, the Independent candidate for
Spotland and Falinge, exposed how the Rochdale councillors
had shared out their generous stipend pay among themselves.
 Among the opposition, only the Lib Dem councillors 
Andy Kelly and Irene Davidson voted against the rises 
and refused the increase, meanwhile on the Labour 
side councillors Andy Bell, Malcolm Borriss, 
Chris Furlong and Billy Sheerin also refused the increase.
Of the 60 Rochdale councillors, according to Rochdale
Online, all the others including the Tories took the
extra State stipend either in part or in full.

Below Carl Faulkner gives his views on the way the Rochdale 
municipal establishment handled the issue of their own stipend:

NO MANDATE TO UP COUNCILLOR'S ALLOWANCES !
by Carl Faulkner

NOT a single councillor was press-ganged into becoming a councillor.  It is an entirely voluntary position.  Not a single councillor has ever stated that if elected, they will be wanting increased allowances.  

If the allowances were not sufficient, then they should have not stood or alternatively, stepped down – there would not have been any shortage of people willing to take their place.

The way in which the rise in allowances was brought about was indicative of the self-serving way in which councillors and senior council officers often act.  The public were given one week’s notice; the rise itself was timed to come into effect in a year that there were no elections.  

It was a cynical, deliberate act to exclude public opinion from the process.  But it was entirely consistent with the arrogant and underhanded way in which the public (and press) are deliberately excluded from major decisions of public concern.

But should we be surprised?   It is councillors who decide on the appointment of the Chief Executive.  It is the Chief Executive, at a time of his choosing,  who hand picks the panel who then recommended the extortionate rises.  The favour returned.
******

Blacklist Campaign & Police Involvement

LAST Wednesday with the walkout of the Spycops inquiry in a show of no confidence in Judge Mitting.  The Blacklist Support Group took that décision in solidarity with others families including the Lawrence’s and other groups being represented within these proceedings.
Our collective message was clear - We are done with stonewalling and whitewashes. 
Last Friday - The Met Police finally officially confirmed that Special Branch and other police were involved in the Blacklisting of construction workers.  The following disclosures have now been widely reported in the worlds news. Blacklisted workers appeared and our supporters appeared on TV and radio throughout the day.  This has been 6 years going back to 2012 since we first raised it through our QC Imran Khan through the IPCC. 

Blacklist Support Group would like to have it placed on record our appreciation for all the activists, lawyers, investigative journalists, researchers, trade unionists and politicians who have worked alongside us and whose efforts have finally forced the Met Police to make these admissions. 


After the revelations about police collusion in blacklisting,  Unite the Union are now considering opening new legal proceedings against the Met Police.  Watch this space 

With the above in mind, we ask supporters to highlight the Met Police admission to their local elected Police Commissioner, many of whom are Labour politicians and run our Police Forces.  We suggest that our supporters send letters using the text below as a standard template making amendments as you see fit:  

Blacklist Support Group open letter to our Police Commissioner’s over police collusion and spying. 

The Blacklist Support Group notes the recent and most shocking disclosures and statement of the Metropolitan Police regarding the undercover policing scandal.  It is with huge dismay that it has taken 6 years for the Metropolitan Police to admit that police supplied information to the unlawful construction blacklist.  And only then after our legal representatives complained to the IPCC back in 2012. 
Our attention must now turn to the solutions.  Aside from any legal action against these political policing units, we call upon Police Commissioners to now come out in full support of those who suffered as a consequence of these clandestine anti-democratic operations. 
 
We therefore ask the Police Commissioners to go on record and condemn the actions of the undercover police units spying on trade unions unreservedly and call for these covert political policing units that spy on legal democratic political campaigns should be disbanded immediately. 

Roy Bentham co-Secretary of the BSG added:
'This culture of impunity has to end.  As someone who seen it as a Hillsborough survivor it’s appalling it still appears to be rife within our police forces.  As Labour politicians, our commissioners also have a duty to serve the people who voted them in.  A statement on denouncing these black ops is surely the bare minimum and we need promises of transparency going forward as that is the only way to win our trust back as ordinary working class citizens'