But surely the police don't frame people?

I've been following the case of Ali Dizaei for some time now. First, second, third, fourth. In short Dizaei was a leading black police officer and activist with the National Black Police Association who was the victim of an internal investigation called Operation Helios where the Metropolitan Police Force spent millions trying to incriminate him.

This investigation crossed the line many, many times. Illegal surveillance, intimidation of his family, friends and wife and ultimately presenting trumped up charges ranging from spying for the Iranian regime to overcharging on his mileage allowance. All charges were thrown out and Operation Helios became synonymous with perceived racism and corruption within the police force.

Earlier this year the Met finally got their man on a new charge and Dizaei found himself stripped of his rank and sent to jail for four years. Coppers lined up to tell the media how they knew he was a bad man all along and perhaps operation Helios *had* been justified. The media lapped it all up uncritically, as if the whole attempt to frame Dizaei had never existed.

So there's a new episode to a book that's meant to have had it's final chapter. Today it is revealed that the main witness in the case against Dizaei didn't exist.

The Met's key witness Mr al-Baghdadi from Iraq was not who he claimed to be. In fact he was Vaed Maleki an Iranian who has since vanished into thin air. It's claimed that the evidence this witness, al-Baghdadi, Maleki or whatever we want to call him, gave was untrue and that, as a key witness, the fact that he lied multiple times under oath fatally undermines the case against Dizaei.

Dizaei will be in court on Wednesday (tomorrow) seeking an appeal on his sentence which may result in a re-trial. I want to wish him the best of luck.

Climate March this Saturday

This Saturday (December the 4th) is the national climate march, so I thought I'd better highlight it! Here's the details;

Timetable:

10.30 am Protest Bike ride assembles at Lincoln's Inn Fields - to join the main protest at Hyde Park later. See here for further details and route map.

11.00 am Climate Service at the Church of the Annunciation, Bryanston Street, W1H 7AH organised by Christian Ecology Link, see here.

12.00 noon Assemble on North Carriage Drive (just west of Speaker's Corner), Hyde Park (Marble Arch tube)

12.00 - 1.00 pm Help us spell out a message for Zero Carbon by 2030 - with hundreds of people in a photo taken from above in Hyde Park. Get there by 12 noon prompt to ensure your place in the photo and to give us time to get the best photo!

Zero Carbon March to Parliament
via Park Lane, Hyde Park Corner, Piccadilly, Piccadilly Circus, Lower Regent Street, Trafalgar Square, Whitehall.

2.30 pm: Climate Emergency Rally outside Parliament. Speakers to include Caroline Lucas MP (leader, Green Party), John McDonnell MP (Labour), Michael Meacher MP (Labour), Andy Atkins (Director, Friends of the Earth), Maria Souviron (Bolivian ambassador), Paul Allen (Centre for Alternative Technology, zerocarbonBritain2030 report), Tony Kearns (assistant Gen Sec Communication Workers Union), Ben Brangwyn (co-founder Transition Towns), John Stewart (chair, AirportWatch), Sophie Allain ( Ratcliffe 20, Climate Camp).

Tea, coffee, soup etc. will be served by the Brixton Tea Party.

5.00 pm: Afterparty at The Enterprise Pub, Red Lion Street, Holborn. See here for more details.

Download the flier/poster for the event here.

RIP Leslie Neilsen

Sad to hear of Leslie Neilson's death today. In tribute I thought I'd post my favourite Naked Gun / Police Squad clip which includes a couple of exciting cameos and culminates in what I think is one of the best lines in cinema history.

Half a dozen links

A few items that you may or may not have missed...

• Carnival of Socialism! Call for submissions at Rivers Edge.
  
  
• Fun news of the week. The NUS President Aaron Porter has apologised for his "spineless dithering" over student protests. James expands on the theme.
  
  
• Paul Krugman in the New York Times explains the Irish crisis. Left Banker compares Ireland to the UK.
  
  
• Disabled people against the cuts.
  
  
• Jane on the Tories and the environment.
  
  
• Claude explains some figures about unemployment.
  

Guest Post: Coaltion of Resistance thoughts

I wasn't able to make the Coalition of Resistance conference on Saturday as I was in a meeting across London discussing a very different deficit. However, Natalie Bennett has kindly written up her experiences of the day for me. By the nature of these things her impressions are very much shaped by the sessions she attended;

The Coalition of Resistance national organising meeting on Saturday saw a packed Camden Centre with 1,300 registrants spilling from the main hall, a strong and determined mood, and lots of solid work in the breakout sessions...

I've written elsewhere about the Women Against the Cuts session, and I unfortunately couldn't make the morning session, when Jean Lambert reportedly gave a storming speech, but I was impressed in the afternoon plenary by the argument of Dot Gibson from the National Pensioners' Convention, who said that her generation had a responsibility to account to the youth of today - to account from "where we came in and where we got to".

In 1945, she said, there was a general determination in society not to return to the pre-war situation where everyone had to pay for education, pay for medical services, and there was widespread unemployment. Universal provision was meant to prevent poverty. "But now my grandchildren don't know if they can get a job or can get somewhere to live."

She said: "A compromise was made after the war. That compromise was the mixed economy. The private sector - the pharmaceutical industry, the rail stock manufacturers - could use the public sector for profit. That laid the foundations for what Thatcher, Major, Blair and Brown have done since."

Rapper Lo Key had an interesting suggestion: MPs supporting the rise in tuition fees should retrospectively pay £9K a year for the free university education they had enjoyed.

Kate Hudson from CND put it plainly: "The redistributive state has been the liberator for millions of people."

She dismissed the argument that Britain's nuclear weapons could in any way be defended as job generators - "There are a maximum of 7,000 jobs in our nuclear weapons systems, which means it costs millions of pounds per year per job. If you invested the same money in sustainable industry you would create many thousands of jobs. Nuclear is a dead end in every respect."

For other reports on the Coalition of Resistance see: Natalie on women against the cuts, Liam's uncharacteristically positive thoughts, Derek's thoughts, Permanent Revolution, Luna17, lots of images and videos and things on the CoR site.

A time of cuts: what should councillors do?

The sad fact is that over the last thirty years the power of councils has been steadily diminished. Year on year councils have become more and more the local administrator of national government than the governmental arm of local communities. We've seen a fundamental centralisation of political power in this country at the expense of local democracy.

So when it comes to national spending local councils have a lot less lee way than they've had in the past. The national government has forbidden council tax rises to ensure that local councils are only able to meet their budgets through cuts in services. There's no clearer indicator that the Coalition's priority is to shrink the state and reduce services and jobs rather than address the deficit when it tries to prevent councils raising revenues as an alternative.

Even the ability of councils to set an 'illegal budget' has been curtailed and council officers are obliged under law to have the national government take over councils that are even considering setting such a budget. So even if it was an admirable policy (and I'm not sure about that) it's a fairly pointless rhetorical demand when no local council could even try it.

I have heard a couple of people advocating forcing the national government to implement the cuts in their council, but what sort of psycho actually wants the Coalition to come in and set an example to the nation with the services they and their neighbours use? I guess the sort that thinks proving a political point is more important than libraries and nurseries... there you go.

So what's the alternative? Bite the bullet and start butchering the first born? No, for a start that would be rude. However there is no quibbling with the fact that for councillors in this position it is very grim indeed.

As our starting point I think we need to both explain why the national economic policy is wrong headed both economically and morally. It's not enough to say that the cuts will hurt (and by hurt I mean immiserate, distress and kill) we have to make the case that the cuts wont work and are unnecessary.

However, having framed the debate in that way we're no closer to giving guidance to a local councillor who's wrestling with the decisions before them. The general election result was a disaster for Britain but it's a disaster we're in the middle of so we need to go further than outline an alternative national economic strategy, "Cllr Blogs" needs to know how to avoid closing down home help for the elderly.

Green councillors across the country have never felt prissy about voting against budgets before the crisis and I hope the pressure of the 'there is no alternative' Westminster consensus wont push them into thinking that they have no choice but to vote for savage cuts. But they'll need more than a stubborn attitude as ammunition - there need to be positive proposals on how to deal with the age of austerity.

I think Darren Johnson got the tone right in this release on why he'll voting against Lewisham Labour's cut package this Monday. Here's an edited version;

Cllr Johnson said, "I strongly oppose what the Conservative/Lib Dem Government are doing nationally. But I am also appalled with how Labour are going about this locally. Labour's plans amount to a massacre of local services."

He continued, "Rather than making cuts to frontline services I want to see Mayor Steve Bullock make savings by slashing senior executive pay, cutting the millions spent on expensive private sector consultants and cutting down on glossy PR and council spin."

The Mayor's cuts programme, which will be presented to councillors on Monday, includes closing the Early Years Centre in New Cross, cuts to nurseries, street cleansing, parks and schools improvement teams.

Rather than cutting vital services Greens want to see the Council make savings by:

• cutting senior pay for top council executives
• reducing the millions spent on expensive private sector consultants
• cutting down on glossy PR and council spin
• reducing council fuel bills by making our schools, libraries and other buildings more energy efficient
• working more closely with other public sector bodies to cut admin costs

Darren said, "The Government argue that these cuts will help clear the deficit. But experts have warned these cuts will harm the economy, not help it. Cuts this big will simply increase unemployment, meaning that the government raises less in taxes and will have to spend more on benefits. Green MP, Caroline Lucas, has set out an alternative plan to tackle the deficit. Instead of hitting public services she has shown how we can tackle the deficit by increasing taxes for the very wealthiest, introducing a Robin Hood Tax on financial transactions, clamping down on the billions lost through tax evasion and tax avoidance, and scrapping the Trident nuclear weapons programme."

It seems to me that this is a better position than a simple 'no cuts' position which doesn't discriminate between savings and attacks on services. I'd also say there is much to commend this letter from former Lewisham councillor Ian Page in the Evening Standard where he says that;

THE LABOUR councillor introducing last week's cuts package in Lewisham blamed an international crisis and the actions of the coalition government.

He didn't mention that the reductions were part of £60 million cuts agreed by a Labour council and mayor back in March under a Labour government. Aside from high-profile cuts such as library closures, there are many others that will be invisible to the general public but devastating for those concerned: such as the closure of Opening Doors, a service for the long-term unemployed providing them with access to facilities to move them towards employment; cuts to adult social care, and the cancellation of project work to raise aspirations in areas of intergenerational unemployment.

The most vulnerable, isolated people are in no position to organise and highlight their plight. Councillors could use council reserves and "prudential borrowing" to buy time and build a mass campaign in order to bolster their demand for more money from central government.

Through such methods Liverpool council successfully won £60 million back from the Thatcher government. When councillors refuse to do this, unions and the community should coordinate strike action and direct action to defend our services.

Leaving aside any Liverpudlian nostalgia, Mr Page is quite right to point out that even before the coalition government was formed Labour were planning massive cuts in services this year. The further into this government we go the easier it will be for Labour to distance themselves from these cuts but the fact is that, in Lewisham, these cuts were going to happen no matter who took control of the national government as long as Mayor Bullock remained in place.

More than that prudential borrowing, as a method to hold back the savagery of the cuts, is well worth exploring, but it seems to be entirely off the agenda. I think that lacks vision and I hope others can make this work even if it only plugs part of the short fall.

However the key point that Ian Page makes, which I think is worth repeating time and again, is that if the council and national government wont serve the interests of communities then those communities need to make their voices heard loud and clear. In the end it will be that democratic movement that has the best hope to defeat the cuts agenda and while councillors need to take their positions seriously in the chamber they should never become so focused on council rules that they forget who they're representing and why.

Tribalism and party politics

All genuine political parties are alliances. There isn't a single significant party in history that hasn't had a number of currents and tendencies within it with their own perspectives and methods - although this doesn't always mean rows and rage, obviously.

For me those tensions are a useful democratic tool. Any organisation that is too ideologically homogeneous is setting itself up for a fall, unable to adapt it's strategy organically, too easily going out of political fashion or unable to test arguments internally there becomes a natural limit to how large or influential it could become.

It's also the case that people join parties for very different reasons and it's good for different groups of people to feel there are others like them in any organisation. When it works best people learn from each other, enjoy the variety and it puts you in a good position to reach into many different communities with a good team of activists.

There are also pitfalls, which is why members of parties don't always welcome with open arms those who have a different vision for the party. It's certainly true that there's a big difference between an idealised utopia of political differences being discussed with mutual respect and intellectual agility and the often personalised and ridiculous nature of internal political debates in all parties.

I think that's where tribalism comes in handy. If you're Labour through and through, if you're going to support every Labour candidate put before you even when they completely oppose everything you stand for, it helps to see the party label as more important than the political content.

In fact, while tribalism is an essential tool for building a stable party capable of running councils and nation states it cuts against fluid political debate and can find loyalists voting in favour of candidates they hate against candidates of other parties who hold far closer views. This is justified, when it is justified, by the idea that there is a larger political project at work and even a crap, say, Green Party candidate is an advance for the cause they so poorly represent despite a candidate for another party being a keen environmentalist and lefty right-on person.

For me I've never really been a tribalist. I've obviously been enthusiastic for particular candidates or parties over the years, but my party right or wrong has never been something I've ever felt quite comfortable with. I happen to think that's quite a healthy position to hold, but it does create problems.

One of the reasons I'm writing this post now is that there are no elections coming up so no one will think I'm talking about a specific candidate, but to draw a hypothetical example - if I want to see my kind of ideas get greater prominence and a candidate for another party is, well, better than the Green one (which never, ever happens obviously, cough) I'm in no position to actually say so. In fact, if questioned, I'd have to put on my most sincere face and lie. That's not really cool is it?

Or perhaps it is. If I'm standing somewhere I don't really want fellow party members announcing on public platforms that I'm useless and people should vote for someone else, even if they think it. And after all why wouldn't they? The usual boundary is that people sometimes don't bother campaigning for candidates that don't inspire them - but actually often they do.

So there's no facility to recognise that politics is so much more complex than what colour rosette someone is wearing. Where does that leave people who have a looser, more open minded attitude towards politics? Well, they could become unaffiliated commentators, but that's rather unsatisfying and sterile. If politics is about taking an active role in your community then refusing a party card might not be the best way of going about this - although some people make it work for them.

In 2012 Londoners will have at least three ballot papers in front of them. There's no party that would allow someone to advocate voting Lib Dem on one, Green on another and Labour on the third - even though, once the specific candidates are all in place, there could be good arguments for doing just that. Not that you'll catch me voting Lib Dem this side of Armageddon.

Does that make all party activists natural liars? No, not at all, some people are just stupid and actually don't know that there might be a difference between candidates of the same party. Others are so base they don't care what the political views of their candidate is as long as it gets them personally one step closer to power.

Still others skirt close to the edge and imply heavily they would vote for the Tory in a particular election and allow the knowledge of party rules to do the rest for them - that's kind of having your cake and eating it too though, don't you think? None of it's very satisfactory though.

I guess this side of the abolition of all parties it's a problem everyone is stuck with. Certainly parties are essential vehicles for political change and the most effective of those parties will always be the best at squaring the circle of broad church pluralism and tribal loyalties that go far deeper than how any particular candidate may or may not vote on abortion, the economy or war.

Post-election party donations revealed

Yesterday the electoral commission revealed the figures for donations to political parties since the May elections and I think they're quite interesting.

The first thing I noticed is that the Labour Party received less individual donations than the Liberal Democrats. I'll say that again, the Labour Party received 185,275 pounds from individuals this last quarter compared to the 210,276 pounds that was donated to the Liberal Democrats, which also came from more individuals.

Of course, Labour's total donations are far, far higher. Of its 2.3 million income, 1.9 million of it came from the trade unions, and almost 1.8 million of that came from four specific unions - Unite, Unison, USDAW and the CWU in that order.

Half of all donations to political parties in the UK went to the Conservative Party, whilst 60% of state funds for 'policy development' went to the Liberal Democrats. That's 352,459 pounds going to the Lib Dem coffers from the state, a funding source that is due to dry up as they are now in government.

Obviously the donations have all gone down since the election, this quarter is, well, a quarter of the previous one which led up to the election. However, the change in proportion of donations (including unions and companies, not including state funding) is interesting.

	Second Quarter	Third Quarter
Tories	47.45%	53.80%
Labour	41.83%	33.74%
Lib Dems	7.88%	5.10%
UKIP	1.42%	6.61%

Extraordinary that UKIP has seen such a surge in donations and is, I think, the only major party to increase the number of donations received from second to third quarter. For them to over take the Lib Dems is quite frightening. Coupled with the level of donations for the Tories both Labour and the Lib Dems are seeing their donations decline.

This may not be a long term trend but worth looking at none the less. I was particularly surprised at how little funding (proportionally) Labour actually get from their members. It's kind of a reverse Obama fund raising strategy, just concentrate on big players and don't rely on the small fry.

Round-up: Students getting hotter

In London I managed to follow the smoke signals towards the protests outside Downing Street and find several thousand students and police blockading the way. Lots of police horses and demonstrators who ranged from school age to uni age and then there was a big jump with a handful of old politicos, like me, seeing what we could learn.

The police had kettled quite a few protesters when I'd arrived. I don't know what they were burning in there but it smelt pretty acrid - glad I wasn't cooped up with that bonfire. They're saying on Whitehall they could be kettled until midnight - and it's freezing! I don't envy those poor kids.

Much of the anger seems to be around the EMA, or Education Maintenance Allowance, rather than the fees hike, which is presumably why we saw so many school kids in uniform (eg here) sometimes accompanied by teachers. I don't know who was escorting who.

BBC has some calming footage from round the country, and the Guardian was following the event ('live blogging, wooo). Anti-Cuts has followed many of the protests today, and you can see my favourite placard of the day here, from Edinburgh where they don't even have fees.

Written reports: Birmingham (pics), Brighton (plus), Bristol, Cambridge (also, statement), Cardiff (tweets, blog), Durham, Edinburgh, Lancaster, Leeds (pic) (also), Liverpool, Newcastle (blog), Nottingham, Manchester (blog), Oxford (plus, pics, blog), Plymouth, Roehampton, Royal Holloway (blog), Sheffield, SOAS, Southampton, Southbank (also), Stroud, Tottenham rally, UCL, ULU, Warwick uni (pic).

Video reports: Cambridge, Hastings, Manchester, SOAS, Southbank, Sheffield, Westminster Kingsway, The University of Strategic Optimism (Llyods TSB London), Whitehall as they move the kettle, London being young and jolly.

I was also enjoying twitter where I found out that there were chants "Your Jobs Are Next!" at police. However, what's interesting is that twitter seem to have been censoring the protest tag to stop it 'trending' (ie being seen by everyone in the country) and here are the stats to prove it.

Advise: The Activist Legal Project has a good set of direct action guides which are also fun to read.

Late entries one: Really Open University, Next day of action Nov. 30th, Met Police information, Indymedia thread, French solidarity demo, Socialist Workers' reports, Bright Green picture round-up

I'll add more when people tell me about them / I spot them. Email me or leave a comment if you want your stuff included and I've missed it here.

Late entries two: Mark Steel on Gove's guide to social class. NUS official response, sorry about this but the Daily Mail has some nice pics, particularly if you lke smashed up police vans.

Late entries three: Adam Ramsay on whether the protests worked, Doc Richard on preparing to be kettled, Molly was protesting in Cardiff, Simon in Newcastle, as was Mark, Journeyman's daughter led a student walkout, Alisdair has more photos from Edinburgh, PR reports from John Roan school - where-ever that is.

Late entries four: Edinburgh uni against the cuts, useful discussion of whether the police van was a 'plant', video of anarchist whacking protester at said van, Jonathon Warren has some top notch photos.

Late entries five: Indymedia - prepare to be clubbed on the head, one police view, do read the comments, Coalition of Resistance pics. The South Yorkshire Star, Clegg forced off his bike, Brighton university still occupied, BBC runs 'your pictures', The Great Wen looks at how the kids have always been vilified.

The Telegraph photography blog describes how difficult it is to take a good pic of people smashing up a van when so many of your colleagues surround the vehicle, and they post their results. Herald Scotland sums up protests north of the border, The Liverpool Daily Post says protesters went too far because someone threw an egg.

Last lot?: Infinite thought, New Internationalist, more on Oxford, new from the Guardian, BBC on continuing occupations, police chief predicts disorder, Cambridge student punched by cop, Ben Duncan reports from Brighton. Communist Students in Manchester.

Students: they've all done very well

If you're not already following the twitter hashtag for demo2010, and Lord bless those not in the grips of twitter, then I'd like to recommend it. It's a moment by moment update of events happening up and down the country from students protesting the government's education policies.

It probably comes as a surprise but students can actually speak for themselves and articulate what they're protesting about without the BBC or Guardian having to speak for them.

Today's actions are extremely impressive with occupations, marches and lobbies seemingly in every town and city across the country - maybe even Bishop's Stortford... no, no, that would be asking too much of the sleepy market town (prove me wrong Stortfordians!).

I know in Cambridge and Hackney the protests have seen school kids, in uniform, with their teachers!

It's early in the day and I'm not the person to ask about what's going on - but hopefully I'll round up some of the events later today. Feel free to forward suggestions of blog posts and comment from students if you spot them, or write them.

Photo credit to Adam Ramsay.

Micro-finance in the spotlight

For a few years now micro-finance has been held up as one of those ideal ways of combating poverty in the developing world. Essentially a system of small loans to people who wouldn't otherwise be able to get credit the idea is that it enables the poor to buy that shovel to help themselves dig themselves out of poverty.

But as Karl Marx once said "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish and you miss a golden business opportunity."

So the companies that have been managing the micro-financing operations make their money by charging interest well over the odds and because the system works by lending to small groups it allows the company to put pressure on entire communities with weekly meetings monitoring what they're doing to repay the mini-loans despite that fact that many workers are paid yearly. That's right, it turns out that micro-finance is another word for loan shark but, and here's a sweet spot, they aren't regulated in the same way as money lenders.

Because the ideology behind micro-finance says that you beat poverty through enterprise it was held up uncritically as a success even before the schemes were operational.

What started out as an idea to alleviate poverty has become a way of getting the poorest into the kind of debt they hadn't been able to get into before, and that has a very real price - including a wave of suicides, like that of 16 year old student Lalitha Mursilmula who was told by the company she would have to become a sex worker in order to pay off her families debts. She ran home, wrote a note to her family and then drank a lethal concoction of fertiliser. The unethical behaviour of the micro-finance has deepened an already existing problem.

In India politicians have ordered people *not* to pay back their loans because of the social harm the industry is doing which in turn is leading to India's own little sub-prime crisis. It seems to me that the way to solve the problems of capitalism is not to find new and more ingenious ways of tightening capitalism's grip on the world.

Unite's union general secretary results

Derek has posted the results for the General Secretary election for Unite and amazing reading they make too.

Between them the two leading left candidates achieved more than 63% of the vote and Gail Cartmail (who I saw speak at a Keep the NHS Public meeting last week where she called for an insurrection!) managed a good 16.4% despite receiving an almost blanket refusal on the part of the press to acknowledge she was even running.

The winner, Len McCluskey, is a Labour Party member backed by the United Left, while runner-up Hicks ran on a take back the union ticket and is well to the left of Labour. It's a new position when union members are deciding which brand of left they want to represent them, particularly when that union is a 'super union' with one and a half million members.

Results:

McCluskey	42.4%
Hicks	21.8%
Baylis	19.3%
Cartmail	16.4%

You can read the candidate statements here.

Of the four only one candidate was from the right of Unite, Baylis, who entered the election as a favourite to win, is a 'respectable' in favour of a 'service union' and generally opposes strike action. The fact that he polled so poorly indicates that there may be real shifts taking place inside of the union.

Your weekend misc

A few more links to help you find your way around the internet tubes;

• What does anarchism really mean? Guardian.
  
  
• Sovereign buses are victimising their union activists. Liam.
  
  
• A plastic state of mind. Suitably despairing.
  
  
• Is TfL lying about it's claims on unmanned stations? BBC.
  
  
• Ed Rooksby is brilliant. But who's right about human nature? Comment is Free.
  
  
• Standing up for local media. Ben Duncan.
  

What Lord Young tells us about politics

Lord Young, who along with Caroline Lucas won a Spectator award this week, has quit his unpaid role advising the Prime Minister. His crime? Having lunch with the Daily Telegraph. Serious stuff.

Actually the key thing he said that has been held up in horror was "the vast majority of people in the country today, they have never had it so good ever since this recession - this so-called recession - started."

Now, as it happens, this is factually incorrect. His opinion that low interest rates meant most people with mortgages had more spending money is not borne out by the statistics but, I'd argue, being wrong about something over lunch is not enough grounds to lose your job.

Labour is posturing saying that those out of work will be "offended" by the peer's remarks which is irretrievably prissy. A minor figure, who isn't even in the government, tells a journalist they think the rhetoric around the recession is overblown over what sounds like a rather sumptuous lunch. Hardly that insensitive and hardly likely to offend any unemployed person who takes the Telegraph.

Actually my favourite bit of the interview is where he says that the cuts will take government spending levels to 2007's figures which wont be that bad. "Now, I don't remember in '07 being short of money or the government being short of money," Well, of course he wasn't short of money he's Lord blooming Snooty! You can't judge the state of the economy on whether the rich are forced to buy economy beans.

However, I don't think he should have gone. We're breeding a generation of political robots, who serve simply to provide an antiseptically wiped set of progressive sounding sound bites no matter how horrendous the policy. By punishing honesty in this way we deepen the trend towards power for its own sake.

For me it seems that Cameron took a "safety first" attitude towards his health and safety advisor, worried about negative press from these off hand, off message remarks. It shows tremendous weakness on his part that he's afraid that the slightest rustle of leaves means the whole tree is about to come tumbling down.

It also shows how this government is much more of an extension of New Labour than it is of Thatcher. Thatcher's government in the eighties had a tame press that was willing to go to war for it's ideals. When the government was criticised they rarely caved in unless it was completely unavoidable.

Lord Young's departure, for what amounts to rather mild (if wrong) remarks, demonstrates a remarkable lack of nerve or loyalty on the part of the top brass. It also reveals Cameron's priority to be seen to "care". That's the taint of Blairism not the boot print of Thatcher and the Coalition wont get through five years cowering at just the thought of gunfire.

The mainstream political consensus has led to the death of ideological politics and the rise of a political class that services the industry, seeking power for its own sake. To lose an advisor for such a minor deviation from the party line is a bizarre waste of "talent". I've no idea whether Lord Young is any good at writing Health and Safety reports but his views on the overall effects of the recession can't possibly effect the work he was doing.

It's all very well those in opposing parties, like me, crowing at a Tory head having been taken - but this is a worrying sign that politics is far, far shallower than it should be. No genuinely radical government could survive in a political atmosphere where people can't say what they think without being shot for it.

Manchester Airport Protesters in court

In May 2010, seventeen people were arrested for staging a non-violent protest/ direct action at Manchester Airport, temporarily shutting it down. They did this to stop some of the 5 million tonnes of carbon emissions that the airport is responsible for annually and in opposition to plans to destroy local homes and biodiversity spots to expand the World Freight Centre.

This is the Manchester equivalent to the Heathrow campaign and any support you can give would be very welcome. Of the seventeen defendants 17 people eleven will be tried for 'obstruction of the highway' this December. The remaining six will face a trial in early 2011.

Come to court to show your support. Climate defence is not an offence

Trial 1 – Monday 9th December
Meet at 9am at Trafford Magistrates Court (M33 7NR).

Trial 2 – Monday 21st February 2011
Meet at 9am at Trafford Magistrates Court (M33 7NR).

Or you could send a statement of support to or simply leave a comment on this Facebook page or for more information: http://www.manchesterairportontrial.org

Brian Coleman: worst chair of fire authority ever

Further to my post earlier, as fire fighters protested outside today's London fire Authority meeting London Assembly members quizzed Brian Coleman on the violence against FBU pickets during the recent strike days.

I spoke to an FBU spokeswoman about the protest who told me that "the lobby was very successful. Around 20 women fire fighters, including Sian with her Queen's Fire Service Medal for distinguished service, leafleted Assembly Members as they went in."

I asked her about the violence on the picket line and she said that "The response was so shocking when there were two arrests for the violence, but no pickets, yet we're the ones being accused of violence. The Fire Authority has a duty of care towards its employees but doesn't seem to care that two people were injured."

When I asked about Sian's case she said that "Sain was suspended for bullying and harassment just before she was due to attend an Armistice Day memorial service in uniform. Yet there's a double standard here because normally if there are accusations like this people continue to work, although they might be moved, but they've taken Sian off duty.

"Sian has a long record of history of supporting other women fire fighters so to accuse her of harassment when she has stuck up for so many others is galling. Mind you they weren't able to suspend her before she was due to receive her medal from the Queen, because you don't mess with the monarch do you?"

Assembly Member Darren Johnson asked Brian Coleman in the meeting what action he was intending to take on the violence. Here's the verbatim report of the exchange;

"Here is Brian Coleman's response to the formal question I tabled at today's Fire Authority meeting, requesting an investigation into injuries to firefighters exercising their legal right to strike.

"(i) Question 257 from Councillor Darren Johnson AM (Green Party): Will the Chairman request the Commissioner undertakes a formal investigation, including an independent element, of the following reported incidents during industrial action on 1 November:

"a) firefighter hit by a car at Croydon Fire Station, and withholding of first aid equipment;

"b) FBU London representative and firefighter hit by fire engines at Southwark Fire Station

"And will the Chairman ensure that the findings of such an investigation are published?

"Reply from Chairman: No."

What a disgrace.

Violence against fire-fighters, at fire stations, during a perfectly legal union activity which resulted in arrests (but no suspensions) and he will neither investigate nor publish any findings on these incidents. Brian Coleman - worst chair of the Fire Authority ever?

FBU Defends Sian Griffiths

Last week was a big week for London fire-fighter Sian Griffiths. First she collected a medal from the Queen for "Distinguished Service" and then two days later she was suspended by the Fire Service for her part in the FBU strike.

The heat around the fire-fighters' has been considerable. With picket line violence seeing managers arrested and pickets hospitalised, with the media running stories about fire-fighters refusing to do their duty during the 7/7 terror attacks (stories that would be unthinkable about paramedics, or members of the public) and now the apparent willingness to target union activists.

Even as talks have started the management are clearly prepared to keep playing hard ball and claim they have suspended a number of fire-fighters. Griffiths chairs the FBU's Women's Action Committee in London and was one of the very first female firefighters recruited in the capital.

Yesterday the FBU held a well attended rally to defend the service from job cuts, loss of appliances and proposed changes in contracts. Their campaign to have Griffiths re-instated is just as import because it's bound up in that movement to defend services, which relies on having a strong union and confident members.

The FBU state that "Female colleagues will be staging a lobby of the London Fire Authority meeting between 1-2pm on Thursday November 18" and I for one wish them good luck.

Lovely things happening to lovely people

If, like me, you were delighted with the news of another Royal Wedding pushing all that depressing *news* out of our papers and off the radio, even as far as Australia, you... excuse me... I'll start that again.

Getting married can be a very stressful affair. You have to sort out the flowers, book a scout hut somewhere for the reception, ensure racist aunty Joyce doesn't sit next to your new black father-in-law - and don't mention the cost of it - whew! - madness.

It must be ten times worse if you're a Royal Family member. For a start booking out a Cathedral must cost a packet. I hear the entire thing is going to cost in the order of thirty million quid, which is a lot of sausage rolls and Cava I can tell you. How are they going to afford it all? I mean the Prince doesn't even w... pardon? Who's paying for it? The greedy buggers!

Sigh.

I know this is meant to be a cue for a miserabilist rant about the Royals, but I thought I might take a different tack to this story about a couple of irrelevances who're squeezing the state for everything they can get due to an anachronistic travesty of an institution.

You see, while I take the abolition of the Monarchy as a given, I do want to avoid the traditional grumble fest of negativity that surrounds these events. Too late you say? Well, yes, you're probably right... but regardless there is an argument that goes 'why are we spending money on this huge bash when there are people sleeping in the streets?' and I'd like to take a moment to edge, ever-so-slightly away from that.

Whatever the horrors that David Cameron is planning for us with his happiness index there is an essentially correct point at the heart of it which is profit and growth are not anything like the same thing as happiness and fulfillment.

Now thirty million is not a huge amount in the big scale of things. It's half the cuts Lewisham council are going to be making over the next three years for example. That's something obviously - libraries saved, nurseries staying open an extra year, that sort of thing - but seeing as the coalition want the cuts and won't even save front line police it seems unlikely that the money would have been spent on that rather than ordering a new Afghan gobbling machine.

I'm cautious simply because the same argument gets wheeled out over the arts, over community festivals and all kinds of joyous cultural wheezes. Why should we spend money on opera when there are children starving? Why spend money on modern art that most of the population doesn't understand when many pensioners live in poverty? Why indeed?

For me I believe that the coming inevitable socialist utopia will still have national occasions like this. Not Royal Weddings of course, but celebrations of essentially meaningless events - and I suspect we'll have them long before all world hunger is cured and poverty eradicated.

A society that doesn't have 'coming togethers', where we see the value in each other and citizens get to feel a genuinely valued part of society, is unlikely to care much about the old, sick or the young. If we don't have fun or pride or culture, even difficult culture that people don't understand, then there precious little chance that ordinary people are going to devote their time to good causes.

Socialism isn't all increasing zinc production and utilitarian tower blocks you know. There needs to be some light in there too.

This event is, of course, as divisive as it is uniting and serves to exclude the nay sayers as much as it helps anaesthetise the enthused - but there is worth in celebrations - even when we're a long way short of a perfect world.

Six sites

I don't tend to do long link lists in the side bar. I know it's the fashion to link to everyone in sight but I don't find them very helpful personally so try to go for short and usable rather than covering everyone who might conceivably link back to me. Probably a bad blogging policy, but then I've never been that bothered about numbers of readers.

I do tend to link in posts though and do enjoy that element of blogging that turns what could be a pretty solitary exercise into a community. It's also true that links in posts generally produce a lot more hits than side bar links, partly because of the growing popularity of RSS readers which mean that readers don't actually see your site anyway - just your posts.

I'm always a little suspicious of bloggers who don't link to others in their posts, although link exchange deals have never really appealed to me. You should just link to stuff you like, or at least you think is interesting. But again you can't link to everyone so you're bound to offend the easily bruised whatever you do.

Anyway, to cut a long story short here are six sites I've come across recently that are worth checking out;

• Scotland Votes is an excellent tool for all your Scottish voting needs.
  
  
• Jody McIntyre is an interesting activist blogger.
  
  
• Julia Stephenson is a green/media/animal rights person.
  
  
• Saci Lloyd is the author of the Carbon Diaries.
  
  
• The Common Wealth Network is an interesting Christian lefty site.
  
  
• The right to recall is the NUS campaign to unseat Lib Dems.
  

Australia: the saga continues

The rise of the Greens has created ripples in Australia. New Green MP Adam Bandt will be moving legislation for gay marriage, they're progressing reigning in the banks, going forwards on euthanasia, indigenous rights, and there's some green stuff too... you know animals, climate change, that sort of thing.

As advances are made around the rights of refugees, one of the fore front Greens' campaigns, there's lots to be happy about of course. But the upcoming Victoria state elections are a taste of things to come.

The other parties are responding to the rise of the Greens, and it isn't necessarily pretty. As the Australian points out Labor are getting confused by it all. Having to actually fend off a left opposition that can win seats is just messing with their minds and they can't work out whether to hug or slap us.

Meanwhile the tactical haggling over the AV election preferences continues, which could see the Greens really lose out (note to all those people who say AV means no more tactical voting: WRONG!). The Liberals have for the first time called for a preference for Labor ahead of the Greens which could hurt their chances to win vital inner city seats off Labor.

The Liberals have signaled that they see the Greens as the greatest threat by saying they will preference the Greens last (ie behind Labor, fascists or any old candidate really) shows we're being taken seriously, but is also a new challenge as the two main parties are rethinking their strategies towards the new kids in the Parliamentary block. Meanwhile Labor and Greens have failed to come to a deal on preferences which some think may usher in a right wing state government in Victoria.

Of course the Greens are at a record high in Victoria at 19%, almost double their vote at the election in the region, putting them in contention for some good wins and also making it a dangerous ploy for any party to openly attack them, as many candidates, from both sides, may well be relying on Green preferences to win.

If the Greens can hold their nerve against this new concerted opposition from the other parties it could well be another advance. However, it's a useful lesson that victories bring with them new problems as well as the joy of success.

Sunday Misc

A few selected links;

• You might like to try out Alice Rose Bell.
  
  
• You might like to help Greenpeace build a new Rainbow Warrior.
  
  
• Greens Engage is not my favourite site but this piece by Jessica Goldfinch is rather strong.
  
  
• Hagley Road to Ladywood starts a new feature: cliches of 2010.
  
  
• Raphael has been looking at how the immigration cap has effected scientific research.
  
  
• And finally the Daily Mail has finally taken to parodying itself. They launch their campaign on turning the clocks back by demanding "don't let them make you live your life on Berlin time!" Glorious.
  

My last student post - honest

The press agenda around the student protests on Wednesday was pretty clear. Even the so called liberal press decided to characterise the protests as riots which is a deliberate exaggeration and one we should not go along with.

The media love to sex up a story and dry reports about the proposals that led to the protests are nowhere near as interesting as a marauding horde. For example, all the press went with the 'perfect' photo of a masked hooligan breaking a window with a well placed fire just to the side.

Of course if the picture is taken from a different angle it tells a rather different story. Namely that the window smasher is clearly on his own surrounded by a mob of photographers and behind them... a line of police who watch with a piquant sense of curiosity as this one man riot goes to town.


Likewise with the thrown/dropped fire extinguisher. This idiotic and reckless act on the part of one of the anarchists on the roof of the Tory HQ has been labeled attempted murder and turned a rooftop protest that was pretty harmless into some kind of terrifying airborne assault on our boys in blue.

Yet on the whole the press failed to report that when the fire extinguisher was thrown from the roof the entire crowd below started chanting "stop throwing shit" and the rooftop brigade did. The protest showed it was completely opposed to that sort of moronic behavior just as, I'm sure, most of those reading this will be. More importantly it shows how movements can lead themselves and can actually stop people getting out of hand.

If a policeman had been hurt of killed by this action it would have been a disaster not just for the policeman concerned and their family but also for the movement against the cuts who would have been destroyed by it. That's one of many good reasons to be in favour of non-violent direct action.

However the actions of one or two individuals have been allowed to overshadow the actions of thousands who marched on Tory Party HQ and the tens of thousands more who marched on the day. Blurring the line between violence against persons and political vandalism is something I think we should resist. Compare and contrast the way the press branded the demo with this video which shows the far more positive side of the day.

However, when you're part of a movement you don't get to dictate to everyone in that movement how they behave, you can only put arguments and promote your vision while moving forwards together. The move to say that the Millbank demo was 'tiny' or that they weren't students have been shown to be false with estimates ranging from 2 - 5,000 at Millbank and all of those arrested were students, ten of them children. These were real protesters who share our anger - that has to be our starting point.

I think Adam's piece on a diversity of tactics is spot on and we have to understand the anger - particularly at the Lib Dems - and help articulate the economic alternatives to cuts. It's understandable that there are student voices that want to target the Lib Dems. I think the national day of action scheduled for Wednesday, November 24, at 11:00am which is promoting local direct actions in schools and universities across the country is really important.

You can read more about it in the Guardian, on ITV and read the anti-cuts pdf. I hope it goes well, both confident and peaceful and makes its point felt in as clear a way as possible.

It's also worth reading the pieces in the New Internationalist and on Open Democracy who try to place this developing movement in a wider context.

The key thing, for me, is how students build the momentum from this demonstration and getting bogged down in condemning some stupid acts seems simply misplaced when the government attacks are actually upon us.

The years ahead are going see a lot of hurt, a lot of protests and occasionally we're going to see things we don't like. My concern at the panic some people felt at the Millbank protest is about what this bodes for the future when, perhaps, there really will be riots.

Weekend misc

There's lots going on and it can be difficult to keep up. That's life I suppose, but it's no reason to give into it.

• There more on the student protests: Billy Bragg, more from Bright Green, Political Dynamite, Trifling Offense, and organising solidarity with those arrested.
  
  
• This week in discrimination news we have the diplomat who lost her promotion because she's deaf, a lovely interview at I love migrants and the joke about ginger bread persons that reveals exclusively that only men wear trousers.
  
  
• Paul Mason writes on the G20 outcomes and the world economy.
  
  
• In France the Greens are merging with other eco-movements, consolidating a move that started two years ago. God knows how that will turn out.
  
  
• Labour are instinctive cutters, the Lib Dems don't like broken promises and the Tories look like idiots. Bridge building? Pah!
  
  
• Graham Linehan on the horror that is the twitter joke court ruling.
  

Today's box of delights

What have I got for you today? Some follow up links on stories I'm following and a delightful picture - that's what!

• Call that a riot? (Greens): Kemptown Ben, Farid Bakht, Adrian Windisch, Beth Tichborne, Andy Wightman, Sam Coates.
  
  
• Call that a riot? (Others): Fit Watch, Simon13, Chris Dillow, Tories.
  
  
• Ben Six had a run in with the law. Weird.
  
  
• I shouted at Iain Duncan Smith yesterday. Why? Well here's some background: Jane, The F-word, Diary of a benefits scrounger, Madeline Bunting, Morning Star, Liberal Conspiracy.
  
  
• Laura Agustin explains why sex worker movements are nothing to sneer at.
  
  
• I have a piece on Scottish Green Party conference at Bright Green Scotland. Caroline Lucas was in the Scottish papers while I was up there.
  
  

The Risque Joy of Students

There seems to be a move in the media and some sections of the political classes to say those who occupied the Tory HQ yesterday were not 'real' protesters. I have to say they looked pretty real to me. I think what they mean is that they don't agree with their methods, but choose to express this in such a way that delegitimises those they disagree with rather than engaging with their argument.

It's also palpably false.

I thought the Young Greens statement on the protests was spot on. We should not define a whole protest 'violent' because of one broken window and an inappropriate fire extinguisher. It is not uncomplicated to say that damage to property is violence, although when the Tories destroyed the mining industry, for instance, it did involve a fair amount of state violence to achieve that.


Some people. who can crop up in the most unexpected places, dismiss the couple of thousand protesters outside Millbank as rent-a-Trots but it's simply not so. By the way how much is it to hire a Trot and do they charge by the hour, or is it more sort of piece work?

There is a growing student movement that's becoming more confident and ready to act and we should, I think, support that without insisting that everyone goes about things our way, not that I'm sure we have a single way.

It's perfectly legitimate to have differences of opinion or doubts, or to get frightened on a demo, as this excellent post illustrates. However as Jamie outlines here the student train is leaving and we ought to wave them off with a smile not allow side issues to derail that support. The coming years are going to be tough, and evidently some of us are going to have to harden up otherwise they'll be very inconsistent friends.

Students are right to be angry. Students are right to protest. If anything we need more energy, not less, in these movements to help them show the rest of us the way. For the first time in ages I'm feeling hopeful, and for that I'd like to thank those students who took things up a notch.

Student Revolt

If there's a lesson in life we should all learn is that students must never break windows unless they're members of the Bullingdon Club. You see, you get a better class of vandalism at Oxford, for example not a single student at today's protest was sporting top hat and tails, nor was any on horseback - pathetic.

There's a number of excellent reports from today's demonstration from Adam Ramsay, Sofie, Jamie Potter, Whirled Peas, Political Dynamite, Nina Power and Red Pepper are among them.

The day before John Harris told students to avoid anyone 'leery' and the BBC reinforced this on the day although the video is lovely. It seems that the story is now going to be students smash some glass rather than government smash education, but that's a decision they choose to take.

Many students who attended the demonstration today, where students occupied Tory Party HQ, have been puzzled at how little the reports of the day in the press resemble their experiences. I really don't think it's the job of the media to condemn the protests - surely that's the NUS's job.

It seems particularly bizarre to see students condemned for a broken window by the same people who justify the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems to me that some people in British politics have got things all out of proportion.

Current reports say that there were 35 arrests and the police say they're very embarrassed at how they handled the situation claiming they were taken by surprise by the students. You've got to get out of bed pretty early to get one over on students... possibly.

I suspect and hope that this will be the first of a growing wave of increasingly militant demonstrations, occupations and actions against the cuts. Blair taught us that if you just march the government will ignore you and the Lib Dems taught us that you can't change policy by voting for change - all their pledges have turned to dust. So it looks like we need to turn it up a notch. Well done everyone.

Labour's racist current: Woolas edition

I do feel sorry for Labour. It's been simply months since they've been allowed to lock up a child because of the colour of its parent's passports. It's been months since they've been able to bomb foreign parts and then claim they've "moved on". The poor darlings have had thirteen years of scapegoating, discriminating against, murdering and imprisoning various dark skinned individuals, so it must be difficult coming to terms with the idea that you no longer get to be the big man in the big house.

It's always been a quandary for Labour Prime Ministers. Which foreigners you bombs, which ones you torture, which ones you lock up and which ones you allow to hoover your living room at the minimum wage. I feel for them, because these are hard decisions.

No wonder Labour MPs are kicking up a stink when one of their own is getting his comeuppance. While the leadership understand what's required of them in the press with words of condemnation for Phil Woolas, the MPs are far less disciplined.

Here you can watch Ed Miliand put clear water between himself and the man that only weeks ago he'd promoted to the shadow cabinet - to the position of shadow immigration minister of all things. He knows which side his bread is buttered. Harriet Harman, the deputy leader of the Labour Party has been taking flack from MPs for her unambiguous statement that people like Woolas had no place in Parliament.

It seems a significant number of MPs are willing to rise up and mutiny in defense of lying, whipping up racial tensions and plain old fashioned hate. They're even raising funds for the man. This local news report (starts 12 mins 50) makes it clear exactly how bad Woolas' campaign was, and that his campaign team was utterly complicit and seem to have no regrets. You can also read the judgment here.

Thankfully not everyone is at one with this. Liberal Conspiracy is rightly organising a defense of Harriet Harman. Whatever you think of her (and I've always had a soft spot for Harman) it's extremely important that the Labour Party is not dragged down into the Neanderthal swamps of Woolas and his co-thinkers.

It was down the line stupidity for Ed Miliband to make this man a shadow minister so close to his court case, opening the party up to such a crisis, but more seriously it showed that Ed Miliband was far from a fresh new left approach to politics by appointing this loathsome individual to such a high position on the eve of his disgrace.

Woolas has a long history of scapegoating immigrants and his enforced retirement is long overdue, it's just sad that it is the courts that brought this about rather than any of the three party leaders he's served under - Blair, Brown and Miliband who appear to have consistently rewarded rather than challenged his approach.

There has always been a racist current in the Labour Party, just as there has always been a current of decent people who anyone would proud to call their friends. Sadly it is the reactionaries who've had their hands on the levers of policy for some time. By the looks of it the dark heart of racism on the Labour benches is far from dead.

Recommended further reading: Paperback rioter.

Misc

Friends, I'm worried you're not spending enough time on the internet. Here's some reading for you to help ween you back into our virtual fold;

• George Monbiot has written about an extremely interesting report produced by the WWF on the psychology of social change. Why is the World Wrestling Federation taking such an interest in progressive movements you ask? Because they understand that climate change is the greatest threat to the modern world that we face, and it is the shape of that society that creates that problem. They need our passion as much as we need their muscular approach to the social problems.
  
  
• I want to like Seumas Milne but when he says things like "Obama needs his own Tea Party" I really do despair. The world needs less tea parties and more tea dances, the last thing the left needs is a Sarah Palin figure to polarise the movement and give a rallying call to all unthinking dogmatists.
  
  
• Mike Marqusee is a very decent bloke and solid socialist. He writes in Comment is Free on how NHS workers delivering cancer treatment have the power to change things for the better.
  
  
• Video of young Israeli activists disrupting Netanyahu giving a speech at the Jewish General Assembly.
  
  
• The Sydney Morning Herald reports on the school that banned a same sex couple attending the end of year ball. ''I put a lot of effort into trying to fix things. I had meetings with principals; looked through the Equal Opportunity Act; all my friends put posters up around the school and the teachers ripped them down. There was an easy solution; they just needed to let me go with my girlfriend.''
  
  
• Dawn Foster takes the state to task for locking up a victim of rape. She asks "where are the headlines for women who don’t come forward, for fear of not being believed?"