Another World Is Possible

Graham Bash at Labour Briefing AGM

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 10:40:00 +0000

I attended the AGM of Labour Briefing and interviewed Graham Bash, a member of Briefing's editorial board and one of the original founders of the magazine. Many Left journals have gone to the wall or reverted to websites only recently but Briefing continues and now has the opportunity of playing a much greater role in stimulating and reporting on the policy debate within the Left.

My "Comment is Free" Article.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:04:00 +0000

This is the Guardian Comment is Free I wrote yesterday, still running on its website today.

We need change now, Gordon

The Campaign Group had nothing to do with the coup attempt, but if Brown does not offer real change, I will back a challenge

About a month ago the weekly discussion meeting of the Campaign Group of MPs focused on the imminent electoral wipeout of Labour in the coming European and local council elections. We decided to write to Gordon Brown to seek a meeting with him to see whether any common ground could be found on the policy changes needed to win back support for the party. No response was received.

Over the following weeks we refused to be dragged into either the plotting to oust Brown or the positioning by others seeking to fill his shoes if he fell. Our line was straightforward – there's no point in changing the faces at the top if there is no change in political direction.

When I then learned that No 10 was briefing journalists that Campaign Group members were involved in the email plot calling for Brown to go, I wrote again to the prime minister requesting that his people desist from this covert briefing. I told him straight that allegations about our involvement in this backstage plotting were untrue and that whatever political differences we had with him they were always expressed openly and honestly. I got no reply.

Few realistically doubted that the prime minister would survive this half-hearted attempted putsch. Nevertheless at the parliamentary Labour party meeting on Monday a chastened Brown for the first time admitted to weaknesses and mistakes and assured Labour MPs that lessons had been learned and gave the strong impression that changes would follow with intensive discussions within the PLP and party, and that a raft of new policies would be announced.

Labour MPs have taken false comfort in the Tories not surging ahead in the percentage share of the vote, ignoring the role Ukip plays in siphoning off Tory votes in European elections that largely return to the Tories in general elections. They cling to the statistic that Cameron needs a 7% swing to win the next election, which has only been achieved twice in the last century, forgetting that they themselves were party to just such an achievement only 12 years ago.

On Wednesday the first of the policy announcements on constitutional reform produced typical Brown-like long-winded, turgid consultations and committees of inquiry, stretching well beyond the election and possibly into infinity.

If Labour is to stand any chance of surviving at the next election, real change has to be visibly under way and progress demonstrated at the latest by the autumn.

A consensus checklist of what constitutes real change is emerging from many sources. Securing jobs by intervening in manufacturing and restoring trade union rights; securing homes by a mass local authority house-building programme; stopping the squandering of public resources by ending the privatisation of public services; reasserting the government's green credentials with no third runway; for young people freezing, as the first step towards abolishing, student fees; for pensioners restoring the link between pensions and earnings; halting the attacks on welfare; paying for our programme by fair taxation and cutting out the waste on the likes of Trident renewal and ID cards; and making government ruthlessly clean, open and fair with immediate electoral reform.

Most of the policy changes are blindingly obvious and readily implementable to re-establish our credentials with each section of the broad coalition that enthusiastically ensured the rout of the Tories and Labour's election in 1997.

These all seem straightforward, sensible and popular. But what happens if Brown refuses to contemplate real change? If we go beyond November without real change visibly under way, what hope is left of Labour not only remaining in government but also surviving as an effective political force at all?

At that stage the only responsible act in the long-term interests of our movement would be to offer a real change in political direction by mounting a challenge to the political leadership of the party and letting the members of the party decide. Let me give notice now that this is the path I will take. If this route is blocked again by MPs failing to nominate, then the alternative is Labour MPs making it clear at the next election that they stand on a policy platform of real change as "change candidates".

Of course, they will be standing as Labour candidates but binding together as a slate of candidates committed within Labour to advocating a change programme, setting out the policy programme they will be advocating as a group and supporting in parliament if elected. Only in this way can we demonstrate to the supporters that want to come home to Labour that there is the hope and prospect of change.

Candidates for Change.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:00:00 +0000

I have written an article for the Guardian's Comment is Free today and issued the following press release.

Labour Left threatens 'Candidates for Change' slate if policies don't change

The Labour left refused to be dragged into either the plotting to oust Brown or the positioning by others seeking to fill his shoes if he fell. Our line was straightforward. There is no point in changing the faces at the top if there is no change in political direction.

Now though Brown is on probation. The political crisis facing the party and the economic crisis facing Labour voters is too great to allow the debate to be dominated by a personality spat between Blairites and Brownites.

John McDonnell MP*, LRC Chair, said:

"If Labour is to stand any chance of surviving at the next election real change has to be visibly underway and progress demonstrated at the latest by the autumn. If we go beyond November without real change, what hope is left of Labour not only remaining in government but surviving as an effective political force at all?

"At that stage the only responsible act in the long term interests of our movement would be to offer a real change in political direction by mounting a challenge to the political leadership of the party and letting the members of the party decide but this route would almost certainly be blocked again by MPs failing to nominate. Then the only alternative is Labour MPs making it clear at the next election that they stand on a policy platform of real change as 'change candidates'."

These would be Labour candidates binding together as a slate, committed within Labour, setting out the policy programme they will be advocating as a group and supporting in Parliament if elected. Only in this way can we demonstrate to the supporters that want to come home to Labour that there is the hope and prospect of change.

Labour Leadership Infighting: What do they think they are doing?

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:12:00 +0000

This is the full text of the article I wrote for Comment is Free on the current Labour leadership debacle, which is summarised in the main Guardian today.

What have they done to our party?Ambition and self-interest have become more important to many in the Labour hierarchy than the struggles of Britain's people
Comments (108)

The Labour party was founded to transform our society. Men and women of ideals came together to give a voice to the large mass of ordinary people, who until then had no consistent or effective voice in the politics of this country. They had such ambition for their class and for the whole country. The party wasn't just about providing the jobs, homes, schools and health service our people so desperately needed. It was also about releasing the talents of so many who had been held back by class, gender and race-based inequality. They were inspired to create a new society.

Reading past Labour party manifestos you get a real feel for the idealism and commitment of the millions of Labour party members, who over generations worked selflessly, often in the most difficult circumstances, without thought of personal reward to advance this cause. Each generation held in trust the party and its ideals that it had inherited from the previous generation of activists. Undoubtedly, disputes broke out in each era and were often bitterly fought but they centred on the basic policies and political direction of the party. Personal ambitions were of course often present but overridden by the overall crusading ethos of the party.

Given this history of a party created and motivated by the highest ideals, founded and motivated by the self-sacrifice of generation after generation of its members and supporters, party members have looked on aghast, in disgust and anger at the self-interested, self-serving political faction fighting among ministers and MPs over the last week. Ambition and naked self-interest have taken over from any sense of political purpose. Saving seats and manoeuvring for cabinet or prime ministerial office seem to have become more important to many in the Labour hierarchy than the suffering being caused to so many of our people who are losing their jobs and homes in this recession.

Handing over power to the Tories, whether in local councils or national government, at a time when our communities need to be protected from Tory policies of public service cutbacks is just unforgivable. What could a Labour cabinet minister responsible for local government have been thinking of when she resigned 24 hours before council elections? No fit of personal pique is worth the sacrifice of a single Labour councillor's seat.

It says it all that as ministers has announced their resignations to the media, not a single policy difference has been mentioned. Typically, the response from Number 10 has not been about identifying and tackling any political issues dividing the party, but to resort to covert media briefing and counter-briefing.

Lacking in political purpose, the infighting within the Labour hierarchy is about personalities not politics, about who can save more of their seats from the potential disaster of the next general election. Candidates who are publicly declaring loyalty to the prime minister and an unwillingness to take on the role have recruited and mobilised their leadership campaign teams.

For the sake of the party we are all supposed to be members of, and more importantly for the sake of the people we are meant to represent, I appeal to this leading clique to stand back and look at what they are doing to the party and to the supporters who have stuck with us through thick and thin. If Labour is to continue in government and have any chance at the next election, the debate about how we use the next 12 months in office needs to be open to all our potential supporters in the party, the trade unions and beyond into the various progressive campaigns and it needs to be about the policies and political behaviour of our government, not the personalities. Bouncing through a cabinet reshuffle simply to tie down potential rivals or plotters can only be a temporary fix.

Over recent years people have been alienated by the policies of illegal and immoral wars, privatisation of public services, attacks on civil liberties, unfettered greed in the finance sector and among the political class, and above all else by being lied to and by being ignored by political leaders. A first step to at least restoring some confidence at least to our own members and supporters could be setting in train a recall Labour party conference – one that is properly open to all our members, supporters and progressives – at which we can debate the policies, democratically agree a new way forward and motivate our supporters once again with the high ideals that our party was founded upon.

Speech to PCS Annual Conference

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Thu, 28 May 2009 00:40:00 +0000

Alice Mahon Leaves the Labour Party.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 17:00:00 +0000

I count Alice Mahon as one of the finest socialists I have known. She is a good friend and comrade. In the light of Alice announcing that she has left the Labour Party I put out the following statement as Chair of the LRC.

Alice Mahon was one of the hardest working, most dedicated and principled members of Parliament in the Labour Partys entire history. The Labour leadership clique should sit-up and recognise the Labour Party has a serious problem on its hands. When someone as Labour to the core as Alice Mahon is forced to leave the Labour Party, the Labour leadership must appreciate the political catastrophe that is emerging.

Alice is a member of the LRC's National Executive Committee and will continue to campaign for socialism in this role.

Smear Campaign: This is not the Labour Way.;

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 16:44:00 +0000

I have posted this article on the Guradian's Comment is Free Webpage on the issue of the smear campaign.

This is not the Labour way

Smear tactics like those suggested by Damian McBride drag the party into the gutter, which is why I have called for an inquiry.

In the light of press reports of the attempted smear campaign against the Tories I have called upon the prime minister to establish an independent inquiry into how this smear campaign was set up, who was involved and who knew what and when in the Labour hierarchy.

Smear tactics like this are not the Labour way. They drag the Labour party into the gutter. Coming on top of the revelations about some Labour MPs' expenses they just add further to the undermining of the belief that Labour party supporters have placed in our party. Labour members and supporters have not worked and sacrificed over generations to create a party that resorts to this type of gutter politics.

The prime minister needs to act decisively to restore the standing of the Labour party by launching immediately an independent inquiry into how this smear campaign was planned. If we are to restore the reputation and standing of the party, key questions have to be answered. Who in the party was in any way aware of the campaign? Which party officials, advisers or politicians were consulted? Under whose authority were the perpetrators working? When did senior members of the party become aware of this campaign and what action did they take?

We need to root out these practices and elements within the party so that in future Labour can be seen to be above reproach.

There was a collective sigh of relief in 2007 when in his first speech after taking over the Labour leadership from Blair, Gordon Brown promised a new politics. His personal ratings collapsed when that summer of promise turned into an autumn of spin over a potential election. His return of the master of spin, Peter Mandelson, to cabinet did little to reassure the electorate that the era of spin was over.

If there isn't a drastic rooting out from within the Labour party of the unhealthy style of politics that the smear campaign revealed in the last few days how can we seriously ask the electorate to trust us ever again.

Political rivalry is one thing but personal smear campaigns scrape the barrel of political infighting. If bitter party name-calling turns people off then smear politics just destroys all credibility in the aims of politicians, the role of political parties and the political process itself.

This smear story can only be killed off by decisive action and that action needs to come from the top, very publicly and very firmly. The Labour party needs to look at itself very closely and ask the question, how can we have allowed the party to degenerate to this.

One of the reasons is that the undermining of democracy within the Labour party by New Labour over the last 15 years has resulted in a small arrogant clique now controlling this party to such an extent that they believe that they can act with impunity.

If we can admit that, there is a chance of change and a possibility of reviving the Labour party that once was trusted.

Debate on Inquiry into Iraq War

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 07:28:00 +0000

The Government promised that there would be an inquiry into the Iraq war at the appropriate time. Now that the Prime Minister has announced that British troops are to be withdrawn later this year MPs are debating today whether the inquiry should now be timetabled. This inquiry is aimed at revealing what exactly happened in the run up to the decision to take this country to war and to discover at long last the truth behind the decision making in Government. As someone who opposed the war and was sceptical about the Government’s motives I welcome an early inquiry. I believe that this inquiry is long overdue. I interviewed Jeremy Corbyn MP who has been an ardent opponent of the war and has called consistently for an independent inquiry.

Bank Bonus Debate Exposes Political Bankruptcy

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:28:00 +0000

The Government's weak-kneed response over bank bonuses and nationalising the banks is pushing the Brown administration to the edge of crisis. People are demanding action and yet by prevaricating Gordon Brown is allowing the Tories opportunistically to take the high ground. The bank bonus debate has exposed the political bankruptcy of the leaderships of all the major parties.

Brown needs to stop faffing around and act fast to end the bonuses to the fat cats, and to take control by nationalising the banks. His credibility is draining fast and swift action is needed if this administration is to survive.

The bonus scandal has also exposed that whilst the fat cats on the Bank Boards have been lapping up the bonuses, many of their staff have been on low pay, dependent on the annual bonus shareout to top up their low salaries.

Each year for five years I have tabled motions in Parliament codemning the big city bonuses as obscene and calling for action with no response from the Government. People's patience with the Government is fast runing out. Decisive action now could turn this around.

Brown needs to realise that for the general public the Governments treatment of Bankers Bonuses is the key test of Who will Pay for the Crisis

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 11:28:00 +0000

I have called upon the Prime Minister today to get a grip and take decisive action over the issue of Bankers bonuses.

Gordon Brown has completely failed to appreciate that the way in which the Government deals with Bankers bonuses is seen as a key test of who will pay for the economic crisis they have caused. Allowing bonuses to be paid to the higher paid bankers who caused this crisis by their greed and recklessness will be seen as fundamentally unfair. Fumbling around with nothing more than ineffective warnings of inquiries is pointless. The Prime Minister needs to get a grip and take the decisive action needed to end the bonus culture and send a clear message that the binge banking party is over.

Ten Days That Shook New Labour: Lessons of the Dispute So Far.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:43:00 +0000

Large numbers of workers taking spontaneous direct action have not only shocked this New Labour Government but have also disoriented some sections of the Left.

I have been off the scene largely because of the 3rd Runway announcement two weeks ago. When the Government announces that 10,000 members of your community are about to lose their homes and you are their MP you have a responsibility to focus your attention on their deep felt cares and concerns. So in the last couple of weeks I have thrown myself into organising meeting after meeting in my constituency, speaking to over 1500 people and contacting by various means nearly 20,000. Their response has been feelings of fear, insecurity, anxiety, anger and sheer determination to fight back.

It is these same feelings of insecurity, turning to anger and determination to resist that has motivated the workers involved in the strikes at the energy companies around the country. No worker can feel safe in their jobs as the recession slips into a depression. People are inevitably fearful for their futures.

They also have no confidence in the existing political structures and process being able or willing to do anything to protect them. The party that they voted into power has turned out to be the very Government that has promoted the privatisation, contracting out, outsourcing, and off-shoring, which have stripped away their basic protections at work, undermined their employment security, intensified their exploitation, cut their wages and forced them into debt dependency.

People have also learnt that working through the official structures of their trade union has been rendered largely ineffective by the persistence of Thatcher’s anti trade union laws under this Government. Increasingly they have also come t know that they cannot rely upon many of their trade union leaderships who have delivered up their unions in support of New Labour and who less than 2 years ago installed Brown as Labour leader, the evangelist for globalisation, free markets and flexible labour.

Without political representation and with limited potential to mobilise through official union channels there is no other route but to take but direct action when fear for jobs turns to anger.

Every member of the Labour and trade union movement should welcome the energy workers getting off their knees, standing up and fighting back. It’s called solidarity.

In any dispute or struggle this doesn’t mean blindly accepting either the analysis or demands of those directly engaged in the dispute. It certainly doesn’t mean accepting without question the media’s representation of their demands. Disputes are at times chaotic with goals sometimes ill defined and often quickly evolving.

This latest round of disputes, like many more to come, has been about the right to work. As this latest crisis of capitalism unfolds many more workers will be demanding the right to work and we must support them.

If we are provide effective support we can learn from some of the lessons of this dispute so far.

First, as the Government has refused to abolish the anti trade union laws the lesson is that if workers are sufficiently determined they can just ignore them. Using unofficial structures has been successful in mobilising this time but by their nature they are difficult to maintain. If the TUC and the general secretaries of major unions showed the same determination and solidarity of the workers in this dispute and stood together to challenge the legal restrictions on trade union rights in Britain we could destroy them once and for all. Future disputes should be made official to bring this issue to a head.

Second, if cheap labour is being used by employers to undermine wages and conditions, its country of origin is irrelevant. Similarly, “British jobs for British workers” was designed to divide us to compete for increasingly scarce jobs, forcing down wages and eroding job security. Just as many of the stewards in this dispute have made clear, we should never allow the bosses or the media to divide us on grounds of nationality or race. Our demand is the right to work for all.

Third, because the EU legislation and court rulings associated with the open market are being used to divide worker from worker the onus is upon us to build urgently the links of solidarity with European unions to enable joint action to protect jobs, wages and conditions. Where the TUC has failed the newly formed TUCG of radical unions could succeed by launching a series of talks and measures to construct these international alliances.

Fourth, as the depression forces more workers onto the dole queue industrial action alone will not be enough to protect jobs and living standards. The question of who will pay for this crisis will be determined by the answer to the question who controls our economy. The battle for control of our economy needs to be fought out politically as well as industrially, and nationally as well as at the level of the firm and industrial sector. Our demand is for a national economic strategy aimed at protecting and creating jobs, investing in public services, ending privatisation and promoting public ownership, tackling poverty and inequality and creating a sustainable environment. The launch of the People’ Charter campaign presents us with an opportunity to mobilise for this change.

Fifth, the depression is likely to present the Left with ever new situations and challenge us to respond swiftly and effectively. Very quickly we need to decide the best mechanisms for the faster flow of information and for the co-ordination of solidarity action. The TUCG, the LRC, the Convention of the Left, union broad lefts and the emerging People’s Charter network of activists, all have a critical role to play. Putting this together quickly over the coming period will be a central task for us all.

New Labour Government to Agree Third Runway at Heathrow

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 23:43:00 +0000

The Government is to announce tomorrow its approval of a third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow.

I have put out this press release.

"Battle against Heathrow Third Runway Only Just Beginning.”

The Government is expected to approve a third runway at Heathrow tomorrow.

Labour MP, John McDonnell, whose constituency includes Heathrow airport, said “The Government’s announcement is not the end of the battle against the third runway, it is just the beginning. Opponents will use every mechanism possible to prevent the runway going ahead including campaigns in Parliament, in the courts, in the planning process, in the media and if necessary in direct action. If the Government is not willing to listen to Parliament or the people then there is no other option but to mobilise the largest coalition of public opposition and protest to halt this disastrous proposal in its tracks.”

From Recession to Deflation and on to Depresssion

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:23:00 +0000

The Government has been consistently behind the curve in its recognition of the threatened depths of this recession and in its response.

Because Gordon Brown threw away control of the Bank of England in 1997 the recent cuts in interest rates have repeatedly been too little too late.

The fiscal stimulus in the form of the cut in VAT and increased public spending has been pathetic in scale and ineffectual in action.

The Government has prevaricated over quantitative easing and continues to dither over taking control of the banks on borrowing and lending.

In the meantime the failure to provide workers with effective rights to job protection, consultation and industrial democracy has meant that companies can get away with treating their employees like chattels as they lay people off in large numbers.

Deflation hangs over the economy and a recession is turning into a depression as the Government looks on in bewilderment.

Increasingly this lack of decisive action will undermine the initial boost in confidence the electorate gave the Prime Minister.

Just one small act of bringing the operation of the banks under public control would stabilise this slide in confidence and buy the Government time to bring forward the radical and comprehensive programme of economic change needed.

There is no evidence however that the Prime Minister either has any idea of how to devise and implement the radical change programme needed or has the inclination to even consider this approach. The result is that each day thousands of working people are paying for this crisis with their jobs.

Call To Recall Parliament over Gaza

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:57:00 +0000

I attended todays demo in London over Gaza and filmed Tony Benn's speech below.

I have also put out the following press release calling for a recall of Parliament. It is ludicrous that a serious international incident is being played out before our eyes and yet the Government is doing next to nothing and MPs are unable to even debate this critical issue as Parliament is not sitting.

Labour MP Condemns Government for Inaction over Gaza and Calls for Recall of Parliament.
Labour MP John McDonnell has condemned the UK Government’s inaction over Gaza and has called for the recall of Parliament to discuss the action needed by the UK government to halt the bloodshed.

John said 'We are witnessing a bloody massacre in Gaza and yet the UK Government has stood by and simply repeated the usual ritual, ineffective statements of condemnation. I am calling for the recall of Parliament to enable MPs to make clear that we need our Government to take decisive action to help halt this bloodbath and secure a ceasefire. Our Government should be taking a leading role in bringing together a global coalition to isolate Israel diplomatically, economically and militarily. Only in this way will Israeli aggression be halted.'

Demonstration against Israeli Attack on Gaza

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:16:00 +0000

I attended this evening's demonstration in London against the Israeli attack on Gaza. The bombings continue with mounting loss of life and suffering. It is widely understood that the assault on Gaza has been planned for some time. It is clearly timed as part of the electoral positioning of the political parties in Israel in the run up to the forthcoming elections. The Israeli political parties are vying to outbid each other on how more brutal they each can be in their treatment of the Palestinians.

The lack of decisive action so far from the UK government is a disgrace and the lack of firmness in dealing with this Israeli aggression by the incoming Obama administration is worrying for its future role on the Palestinian issue. As an aside the question also has to be asked about whatever happened to the Blair initiative?

I interviewed Jeremy Corbyn MP at this evening's demonstration. Jeremy is clear in his view that decisive action is needed from our government.

Attack on Gaza; The UK Government Must Act Decisively to Halt Bombings.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 15:15:00 +0000

I put out the following press release on the attack on Gaza today. I will be joining the demonstrations outside the Israeli embassy. We must do all we can to halt this massacre.

Labour MP, John McDonnell, calls on UK Government to break off diplomatic links with Israel if attacks on Gaza are not halted.
John McDonnell MP said today 'The UK Government must threaten to break off diplomatic ties with Israel if bombings and attacks on Gaza do not stop. The government cannot stand by and do next to nothing as this mass slaughter goes ahead. Gordon Brown should take the lead in threatening to isolate Israel in the civilised world if these disproportionate lethal attacks continue.'

Brown Commits Government to Heathrow Expansion Environmental Madness.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:00:00 +0000

At the weekend many will have missed the statement Gordon Brown made virtually committing the Government to a third runway and sixth terminal at Heathrow airport. This is not just environmental lunacy, it is also an assault on the human rights of tens of thousands who will lose their homes or have their local environment poisoned by air pollution and destroyed by noise pollution.

Brown's position on Heathrow expansion exposes the existence in Britain of a corporate political complex where the interests of big corporations have so permeated government that the major decisions of this Government are indistinguishable from the Boardroom demands of the leading companies in each commercial sector.

There’s a brutal arrogance about the corporate political complex that we know as New Labour. This has been no better demonstrated than in the Government’s behaviour on Heathrow expansion.

It isn’t just that this Government like every past government has acceded to every demand ever made of them by the aviation industry ranging from tax exemptions on fuel to turning a blind eye to the environmental impacts of uncontrolled expansion.

It is more the way that this time government under New Labour has actively colluded and connived with BAA so blatantly to fit up and fix the decision making process.

Spurious consultations and ludicrously doctored scientific assessments; government departments and even Number 10 populated by staff either coming from or going to lucrative posts in the aviation industry and funds poured into political parties or pet government projects to smooth the path of decision making.

A scale of contamination of the policy process we have never witnessed so starkly in this country.

In the face of an immense and unprecedented broad ranging coalition of opposition to Heathrow expansion, the Government has legislated to fix the planning process so that opposition voices are stifled. Even Parliament is to be denied a vote on the issue.

But the world has changed since Government ministers and members of BAA’s board first colluded on how to fix this decision.

The arduous but extremely effective opposition campaign, particularly over the last 5years, has exposed the Government’s role and its arguments for expansion. The result is that deep in Government doubts are now growing about the value of being virtually isolated on this issue.

There is also a growing consciousness that many people will not now simply accept a decision that so blatantly ignores the concerns of a vast section of our population and that rides roughshod over our democratic principles and practices.

Democratic government requires the consent of the governed. The savage impact of Heathrow expansion not just in devastating local communities but also in increasing the risks of climate change is mobilising a campaigning zeal to deny that consent to be passively governed. Vehement opposition has not been seen like this since the suffragettes and the early trade union movement.

Inevitably in this period of recession arguments for Heathrow expansion will be dressed up as vital to saving jobs and the national economy. The hope of the Government and BAA is that short term economic uncertainties will override environmental concerns.

This argument may have some limited impact but with high speed rail alternatives being promoted offering the same employment and economic advantages whilst overcoming many of the environmental concerns, people are not so gullible this time round.

A wise Government would recognise that the game is up on aviation expansion at any cost and make a fresh start on determining a rational policy for aviation’s role in an integrated and sustainable transport strategy.

The alternative is a vista of a decade ahead of a sustained campaign of protest and direct action as Heathrow becomes the internationally recognised iconic battleground for protest against climate change.

I have attached the video of my speech at the recent Climate Change demonstration.

Government's Welfare Reform White Paper- Attacking the Poor with Prejudice

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:24:00 +0000

Yesterday morning I listened to James Purnell's interview on the radio where he decribed welfare benefit claimants as offenders. I wasn't particularly shocked therefore when I saw the detail of his welfare reform white paper.

The reality is that however they are dressed up these proposals represent the first step in implementing the long term New Labour plan to introduce full blown workfare and private welfare insurance.

At my weekly advice surgery I already see too many people who find it too difficult and complicated to gain the benefits they are entitled to.

I raised my concerns in Parliament, explaining that with 2 million unemployed, the country facing the longest and deepest recession in decades and also according to Gordon Brown a lack of affordable childcare, the Government has sacked 30,000 workers in the Department of Work and Pensions. These are the very people who are supposed to help and advise people get back into work.

If there are no jobs because of the recession, putting people under pressure and threatening to cut their benefits is brutal and pointless.

I also question the Governments priorities.

This recession was caused by a small group of very rich speculators in the banks and financial insitutions who brought our economy to its knees but who have walked off with huge bonuses and massive pensions. We now know that between £20 billion to £100 billion a year of tax payments is not paid by many of these companies and individuals as a result of tax evasion and avoidance.

In my view the Government should prioritise tackling this tax evasion by the rich rather than atacking the poorest in our society.

I interviewed Mark Serwatka, General Secretary of the PCS, whose members staff the job centres and DWP.

Pre Budget Statement - No Way Near Enough

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 09:10:00 +0000

This is an article I wrote for the Guardian's Commemt is Free just prior to the Pre Budget statement. I am an admirer of Robbie Burns but the choice of title is not mine.

Cowering, timorous beastie

This is no time for fearful half measures. Darling must seize the nettle of major, redistributive tax reform and bank nationalisation

Whether the government intended it or not, Alistair Darling's pre-budget statement is rapidly becoming seen as a make-or-break move by a government desperate to prevent the recession becoming a depression.
Just before he finalises his plans, it would pay the chancellor to look up some of the ideas of the last group of Labour politicians who experienced an economic depression.
In the 1930s John Strachey, later a member of Attlee's cabinet, analysed the causes and the response to the depression in his books The Nature of Capitalist Crisis and A Programme for Progress.
His mixture of Keynes and Marx reflected the intellectual climate which influenced the policies of governments for the next 30 years. Step by step, the response to recession was first to cut interest rates fast and hard, second to redistribute income from the rich to the poor by taxation and to increase pensions and benefits also paid for by printing money, third to promote large-scale public investment and fourth to develop a "national and public as opposed to a commercial and profit-making banking system."
Against this checklist the government's response so far looks tentative, indeed pretty feeble, and needs radical change.
Following Strachey's model on monetary policy the government cannot afford any more dithering by the Bank of England. We need an immediate and substantial cut in interest rates. Handing control over interest rates to the Bank of England may have been seen as an adroit manoeuvre in 1997 to reassure the markets as Labour came back into power, but now is definitely not the time for political novices of any sort, even if they are senior bankers. It is time for the government to take back control from the prevaricating Bank of England.
It is also time to recognise that the government's policy towards the banks has been an unmitigated failure. The billions in bail-outs have done little to increase lending, and we are witnessing a startling rise in home repossessions by the very institutions bailed out with taxpayers' money.
The government now needs to move towards the full nationalisation of the banking sector to create a national public banking system run in the interests of the British people.
Darling is trailing a significant fiscal stimulus and a large-scale public works programme paid for by substantial borrowing and deferred tax increases. The introduction of a higher rate of tax for high earners is long overdue but the government's proposals are hardly radical and delaying them until after the next election is pointless.
The higher rate should be the start of creating a fair tax-reform agenda, redistributing wealth from the super-rich in order to take the low paid out of taxation altogether. The public revulsion over City bonuses and bank executive salaries has opened the way for radical tax reform. The government must seize the moment.
Just 18 months ago, Gordon Brown used his final budget speech to abolish the 10p tax rate – raising taxes on the lowest earners. Frank Field and others are right to be demanding that this group is compensated. I would go further by raising the personal allowance so that what was the 10p rate is now a 0p rate. This would put money back in to the pockets of those who need it most and those who will spend it most – bringing the maximum benefit to the economy.
But it is also those out of work who must be protected. Jobseeker's Allowance at just £60 per week is an absolute disgrace. As more and more people are thrown out of work, how can it be just that they are expected to live on less than one-third of the pitifully low minimum wage? The same calculation also applies to the 2 million pensioners, who still live in poverty and who still await a decent pension and the restoration of the link with earnings.
Paying for the fiscal package by borrowing will prove counterproductive and the threat of later tax increases simply encourages hoarding not spending.
Instead the necessary boost in expenditure should be paid for by tax redistribution, lifting the cap on National Insurance contributions and introducing a wealth tax but more importantly by ensuring the corporate sector pays its way.
In its 11 years in office, New Labour has cut corporation tax from 33% to 28% – and much of it remains avoided through various avoidance schemes and the use of offshore tax havens. The US has acted to stop the abuse of tax havens. Yet the UK continues to drag its feet, even when we know that the UK is losing at least £25bn per year – thanks to the excellent work of Richard Murphy. We therefore need legislation in the Queen's speech to tackle tax evasion by corporations and the wealthy.
If we are to depression-proof our economy we may need to pay more attention to the radical ideas and policies of those who witnessed the misery inflicted on so many during the 1930s.

New World Economic Order Needed.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:04:00 +0000

Blogging time has been limited recently by political activities but here is an article I wrote for the Guardian's Comment is Free on Friday.

We need a new world economic order
Instead of the G20 summit, we need a new, accountable architecture of global economic co-operation
Barack Obama has decided not to attend the G20 summit convened by George Bush and the lack of involvement by India, China and the developing world in the G7 means that the best we can hope for is that this Saturday's talks are a preparatory session for a more inclusive and wider ranging summit in the New Year.
The timing is just not right to secure anything more than limited agreement on coordinating measures to mitigate the recession – and to set an agenda for the post-inaugural economic summit it is hoped the new president will convene.
Brown and Sarkozy will vie with each other over the weekend for the title of saviour of the global economy, but the reality is that until Obama is installed in the White House and unless China and India are engaged, little will change.
In the meantime, millions of workers worldwide will lose their jobs and homes as the recession bites. Many more people in the developing world will be pushed over the edge of poverty into destitution, with starvation putting many lives at risk. The demand for change, which elected the first black president of the US, has the potential to grow into a demand for change in the system that produces such insecurity and suffering.
Civil society now has a part to play in this transitional period between the G20 meeting and what appears to be the inevitable emergence of a new global institutional settlement that reflects the new world economic order.
Since the post-war world's economic institutions (the World Bank, IMF and WTO) were captured by neo-liberals in the 1970s, they have proved themselves a major part of the problem, not the solution to global economic instability. The same policies that have brought individual national economies to their knees are the policies that these institutions have spread across the globe. They have produced the global crisis.
The globalisation of unrestrained free market, rapacious capitalism by this economic institutional structure has produced inequality and insecurity in the west, desperate poverty in the developing world and a sequence of brutal wars causing immense human suffering. The plundering for profit of the world's natural resources has threatened the very sustainability of the planet.
A new democratically accountable architecture of global economic co-operation is now needed – new institutions pursuing new policies.
Civil society organisations could help set this transformation agenda to focus the minds of the politicians in the same way the popular demand for change after the experience of the 1930s depression created the Bretton Woods settlement. In our own lifetime the Jubilee 2000 campaign forced third world debt onto the global agenda.
An agenda of basic demands from any new global civil society coalition could include:
• A new structure of global economic governance inclusive of China and India and a wider representation of the developing world.
• The establishment of a democratically elected global assembly to scrutinise the policies and operation of the new global economic institution.
• The tackling of destabilising market speculation, through the introduction of a Tobin tax on international currency speculation.
• An end to trade policies and the imposition of trade agreements which are tied to deregulation, liberalisation and the privatisation of public services.
• An end to the policy of global collusion in the operation of tax havens that allow rich individuals and transnational corporations to avoid fair taxation.
• A renewed commitment to achieving the Millennium Development Goals, recognising the productive stimulus this would give the world economy in recession.
• An agreement that every nation signs up to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions on international labour standards so that workers have the basic protections needed as recession sweeps the globe.
With this type of programme we could wrest the process of globalisation from the control of the corporations. The risk of the individual country recessions slipping into a worldwide depression provides the stimulus and the opportunity to create a new world economic order.

The Recession Begins to Hit with Repossessions and Unemployment Climbing Rapidly.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:18:00 +0000

I put the following press release out today on hearing the news about the mounting repossessions being carried out by Northern Rock. We called for action at the early stage of the crisis to halt repossessions and to protect people in their homes by converting mortgages to social rents. I listened to assurances from both Gordon Brown and Yvette Cooper that action would be taken. Nothing appears to have happened and repossessions are rapidly rising. There is a real sense of tragic irony that taxpayers have bailed out the banks only to be evicted from their homes by the very banks that they now own!

Given the significant increase in unemployment I am calling on the Government to bring forward urgently a recession proofing programme to protect people's homes, jobs and pensions. Today's unemployment figures are bad but it should be remembered that each recent set of unemployment figures has had to be revised upwards because the staff cuts imposed by the Government on job centres means that there aren't enough staff left to keep up with the number of unemployed claiming.

Press Release
Is the Government's bank the most ruthless repossessor?
It was announced today that Northern Rock - the bank fully nationalised by the Government - has massively increased the number of homes it has repossessed in the last quarter.John McDonnell MP, LEAP Chair, said:"We fully nationalised Northern Rock, yet the Government's bank is becoming the most ruthless repossessor under the cosh of Government pressure to repay the loans. The Government is in danger of being seen as protecting banks while ignoring people."The Government needs to come up fast with a "recession-proof" strategy of halting repossessions and converting mortgages into homes for social rent."With unemployment rising, the Government should be injecting resources to save people's jobs and that means large scale public investment in major housing, rail and renewable energy infrastructure schemes."

One of the Greatest of Labour's Lost Opportunities

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 23:49:00 +0000

This is an article the Guardian's Comment is Free published from me on Monday on the economic crisis. The media are eulogising about Gordon Brown's role in bailing out the banks but I consider it is just a disastrous lost opportunity, which we will live to regret as the recession hits.
Turning a crisis into an opportunity

The financial meltdown is a chance for the government to transform our economy and taxpayers have the right to demand it

The government has been consistently behind the curve on the banking crisis and the chancellor's statement this morning demonstrates that it is missing the chance of turning this crisis into the opportunity of a generation to lay the foundations for transforming our economy.
In his interviews so far today the chancellor has insisted on an arms-length role for government and on returning the banks to private control as soon as possible. At a time when many British taxpayers will be losing their jobs and homes they are being asked to subsidise the banks in the bad times, simply to allow them to return to the profiteering role which caused this crisis.
Taxpayers will want to know what they have got for their money. Under public pressure, the government has been forced into placing some limited and temporary constraints on executive pay and bonuses – and may appoint some non-executive directors. Not a lot for £500bn of public money. The government has drifted into majority or sizeable ownership of individual banks without any coherent strategy about how to use its shareholding.
Let us be clear, the banks which the government has taken into part-nationalisation would have collapsed entirely where it not for government intervention. The billions invested today surpass even the most generous estimates of the banks' worth.
The chancellor seems oblivious to the unprecedented potential the government now has to lay the foundations for transforming our economy. To give the taxpayers a return for their investment, the government should insist on an entirely restructured banking system and a new set of economic priorities for our financial institutions.
The taxpayer, through the government, should now be forcing through an agenda with control of the board: offering full transparency and stakeholder democracy for customers and the workforce. There should also be a no-redundancies guarantee for bank workers to match the no-loss guarantee to depositors.
A new lending strategy of these nationalised banks must prioritise tackling the worst effects of the recession. We need to promote employment through investment in major public works schemes to meet the UK's needs. We urgently need a major programme of investment in renewable energy generation to tackle climate change. Likewise we need a national programme of council house building to tackle existing housing need, and to provide a safety net for those struggling to pay rent and mortgage costs as the recession deepens.
Such infrastructure investment would also mean large-scale job creation to arrest the rising unemployment levels. This would be a rights-based bank system, guaranteeing:
• bank workers and customers the right to a say in how their bank is run; • a right for the taxpayer to see investment that benefits their community; • a right to a secure home.
These are the opportunities the government is missing on behalf of the British public.
The public will also not look kindly if the government continues to refuse to assist local councils affected by the Icelandic banking collapse. The damage to essential local services by a forced round of cuts would be immense.
As taxpayers are paying for this bail-out, it should be their interests that now become the focus of a programme of major structural reform in the banking sector.

After a Week in the Crisis of Capitalism We Need to focus on Real World Economics

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 22:36:00 +0000

Over the last week most of us have been spectators to the latest crisis of capitalism, barely able to keep up with the hourly developments as markets nose dive, governments come close to panic and financial institutions rock. Debates in the media have focused on either the high economics of the global financial system or on the grubby dealings of the market floors in Wall Street and the City as individual banks and financial institutions are swept away.

Political fortunes of the major players have been on a roller coaster.

On Monday Brown and Darling thought that they could bluff out the first day back in Parliament with only a statement that they were thinking of a plan for the crisis. The market interpreted this as dithering and shares plummeted. By 5 o'clock panic set in and Mervyn King was summoned from the Bank of England only for him to tell the PM and Chancellor that it was for them to take the lead and produce some sort of plan because the Bank couldn't keep on pumping out money forever with no visible effect.

Tuesday morning and the bank bail out plan is produced with a fanfare. Described as daring, innovative, almost revolutionary, by Wednesday Brown is basking in his Falklands moment.

Thursday and all is not going to plan. Despite a small inevitable lift for some banks, understandable with £500 billion of taxpayers money thrown behind them, the plan doesn't seem to be jump starting interaction between banks and restoring credit activities as hoped. Iceland defaults and the various consequences of the crisis are beginning to come out of the woodwork including the large scale potential losses of councils and charities.

Friday comes and the markets worldwide are dropping like stones, recovering a bit and then dropping again. There is a growing feeling that the Brown/Darling quick fix is not going to be sufficient in the face of world wide market slump, the continuing absence of confidence in inter bank trading for fear of default and financial institutions hoarding resources to protect against default. The G7 meeting only serves to demonstrate that the G7 appear to be floundering in the face of the scale of the potential collapse of the world economy.

Brown and Darling may not like to admit it yet but full nationalisation of Britain's financial institutions is beginning to come onto the agenda as the only option left.

Whatever is happening in the stratosphere of high economics it is the real economy of jobs, homes, fuel and food bills and public services that we urgently need to turn to. What action are we going to take through our political parties and groups, through our unions and organisations and within our communities when the recession begins to hit hard and when people start losing their jobs, are repossessed, their services cut and they are unable to pay their fuel and food bills?

We need to start mobilising now the campaigns to support those who will bear the brunt of this recession whether it is workers threatened with the loss of their jobs, public services put at risk by cuts in public expenditure or families losing their homes through repossession. We cannot let our people be forced to pay for this crisis caused in the City board rooms and in ministerial offices.

On Monday at 7.30 in Committee Room 10 in the House of Commons we have organised a meeting to discuss the crisis and how we as a Labour and trade union movement respond. Come along.

The Fall Out from the Bail Out

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 07:24:00 +0000

Yesterday I was trying throughout the day on live media to cut through the New Labour spin and explain the potential consequences of the Government's bankers' bail out for the rest of us and also to ask the question "what next?" Even if this bail out works for the banks it simply let's them off the hook so that they can return to binge banking, which we will pay for with tax increases and cuts in expenditure on public services. This morning the Guardian has published this commentary from me on the Government's bail out for the bankers.

Reckless with our money

The government, in effect, is handing over taxpayers' money to the very people who led these banks to the brink of collapse
John McDonnell MP

The British government has announced a £50bn part-nationalisation scheme. As someone who has been calling for the nationalisation of the banking sector since this crisis began, I should be satisfied.

However, as more details of this package emerge left economists and Labour MPs are increasingly alarmed. The deal is incredibly reckless: the government will only take preference shares in the banks in exchange for a massive investment of taxpayers' cash. The only potential advantage for taxpayers is in dividend payments, if there are any, crucially though the government will have no controlling stake. This in effect is handing over taxpayers' money to the very people who led these banks to the brink of collapse.

If the government is injecting public money, it should also take the right to oversee board appointments, executive pay, and future business operations. The government argues that by taking preference shares, the taxpayer will have first call on dividends. However, the only banks that will come forward to use this £50bn facility will be those in trouble. The market capitalisation of these banks has only been sustained at all by the prospect of a government bail out. Many of these banks are actually bust. Therefore there will be no dividends, we are throwing good public money after bad.

The government should be ensuring the public is protected through cuts in consumer borrowing rates – ensuring that people do not default on their debt and mortgage payments; giving a no-repossession guarantee, providing people with a "right to stay" in their homes – by converting repossessions to social rentals; and securing the jobs of those workers now threatened with redundancy as their bosses' kamikaze capitalism unravels.

But to do that, we would have to take a controlling stake. We should have nationalised to stabilise, with control for the taxpayer to have scrutiny of the banks' accounts, representation on the boards, a pay cap for bank directors and the end of excessive bonuses.

This may prop up a failing system in the short term, but in the medium to long term this deal will have to be paid for and this can only come through either tax rises or (more likely) through public expenditure cuts. This will exacerbate the recession by reducing demand. So while the package might prop up the banks in the short term, it risks further damaging the entire economy in the long term.

This deal is like your neighbour going on a massive spending binge – throwing a party, buying a new car, going on holiday – and then sending you the bill. Taxpayers will end up paying doubly, once through loose subsidies to dodgy banks and the second time as the recession bites and they risk losing their jobs, homes and going further into debt.

At that point they will rightly be asking the government: "Where is the bailout for the British public?"

Immediate Reaction to Government Bans Bail Out Proposals.

noreply@blogger.com (John) — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 07:48:00 +0000

This is the press release I have put out this morning in response to the Chancellor's announcement of the Government's bank bail out proposals.

"Government Plan Nationalises Losses"

"Taxpayers to pay for Bankers' Greed"

"Fear Too Little Too Late"

Commenting on the Government's Banks bail out, John McDonnell MP, Chair of the Left Economic Advisory Panel, said "Without full nationalisation the Government is effectively nationalising the Banks losses and privatising the profits so that taxpayers will now pay for this crisis caused by the greed of the bankers. I fear that it will be too little too late. Without full nationalisation at least we need very detailed and specific conditions on any taxpayers support."

See also the Guardian's letters page where we have published a letter setting out a summary of a people's programme for the crisis rather than a bankers' bail out.

Now that it is accepted that the British economy is in recession today there must be pressure on the Bank of England for at least a 1% cut in interest rates. Without this the recession will be longer and deeper, with the risk of serious deflation and some even talk about a depression.

Already job losses are mounting and repossessions escalating. Our people are beginning to suffer. On Monday (13th October) we have convened a meeting at the House of Commons at 7.30pm in Committee Room 10 to plan the Labour movements strategy to confront the recession. We need to mobilise to protect jobs, homes, and living standards. Come along.