18 years of fighting Chevron in the Amazon

For my friends who don’t support the #N30 strike

A short Facebook note I wrote while en route to a rally in Hull:

I hear a lot of people say that the public sector are lucky and shouldn’t complain while others suffer too, that it’s not fair. They’re right, it’s not fair. It’s not fair that you have poor pay and pensions. We should be fighting to improve your lot too. But this won’t happen if the public sector take a beating – this merely creates a race to the bottom and less likely that your own conditions will improve if your employers can excuse themselves by making comparisons to government employers.

The average public sector pension is something like £6000, not quite gold plated. Many workers already make significant monthly contributions and are now being asked to pay even more, for longer, for a much smaller return. This strike isn’t to ask for more but to protect what they’ve already been promised, which is now at threat from a government who want to make ordinary people pay for the bankers’ folly.

We are not public, private or third sector workers – we are all simply workers. If one group suffers now, we all suffer in the long term. If you fight for your pay and pensions, the public sector will support you however possible. Union law prevents solidarity strikes, a law that helps divide people according to which sector they work in. Don’t let the people who created this mess divide and rule us. We are one. X

Forget about the almost £4bn cuts to funding affordable homes

Where does John Humphreys get his fiersome reputation as an interviewer from?

On this morning’s Today programme he was interviewing Ed Balls. I say inteviewing, it was more like an invitation for Balls to push his five point plan for jobs. At one point Balls effectively blamed youth unemployment on the Tory trashing of the Future Jobs Fund. Disgusting as this policy reversal is, it’s not the only reason for youth unemployment (and Balls knows that) but he was able to get away with this effort at partisan point scoring.

As the conversation moved on to house building and the news that the government will put up £400 million for new developments, Balls quite rightly pointed out the actual £3.9 billion cut in capital funding (pdf, p8) for new builds. Humphreys skirted over this little nugget and conveniently forgot about it when he again tried to press that the £400m is a good thing.

Furthermore, in another segment minutes later in the show about housing explicitly, guests were invited to talk about what the £400m means, for developers little and large. There wasn’t a single mention of the capital funding cut. And this is supposed to be one of our pre-eminent current affairs programmes?

When ‘the markets’ means ‘the 1%’

One thing that’s struck me listening to Radio 4 during my commute is Robert Peston – and other presenters – regularly mentioning “the markets” when discussing the financial crisis.

One thing I don’t hear though is who the markets are. There is no mention of the faces behind the markets. Instead they are treated as detached, abstract phenomena as we hear, on Radio 4 and other news outlets, how the markets “respond”, “fear”, “rally” or are “reassured”.

We’re led to believe the markets are something beyond our control, something to appease and to satisfy. Mainstream journalists fail to ask one of the crucial questions of their trade, one that was drilled into us at university: “who?”

By failing to ask this simple question the markets are stripped of their humanity. They become unstoppable, mystical forces. It’s damned near enough brainwashing.

If we did ask that question, what might we find? That the markets are principally traders (white, male?) in London, Paris, Frankfurt and so on? Or are the markets you and I on the street? Who is it that is being “reassured”? The bankers in their plush City offices or people on the bus home from work in a deprived northern town?

That’s why I now mentally replace any mention of “the markets” or variations of the same on the radio, in the press, on television or online with “the 1%”.

Take this story, for instance:

“Mr Berlusconi has promised to push through another round of reforms to appease the financial markets.”

Which becomes…

“Mr Berlusconi has promised to push through another round of reforms to appease the 1%.”

Let’s try another one:

“The sober economist incongruously nicknamed “Super Mario” received a hero’s welcome in the Italian parliament on Friday as the 1% around the world toasted his expected appointment as Italy’s prime minister.”

And another:

“Chancellor George Osborne said although the eurozone crisis is having an impact on British businesses, the UK must stick to its austerity plan to reassure the 1% about the country’s debt.”

I could go on. I also know it’s very simplistic but, still, it’s something to think about, no?

Baton rounds for #Nov9 protests

The Press Association today carries a story about the Metropolitan Police announcement that they will have baton rounds available while policing the protests in London on November 9th.

The Met said: “There are a range of tactics available if there is criminality and violence associated with the event. One of these is the authority to deploy baton rounds in extreme circumstances.”

However, not quoted by the Press Association (and LBC) were the following lines from the Met:

“To give context to their use, the MPS had authority to use baton rounds during the disorder this summer but did not do so.

“This tactic requires pre-authority, and would take time to deploy, and is one of a range of tactics we have had available for public order, and not used, in the past.”

As far as I can tell, the police are already authorised to use them, although they tend not to, which begs the question of why this announcement was made. To scare off protesters, perhaps, given the growing popularity of Occupy?

We’ve already seen baton rounds/rubber bullets used across the Atlantic, with the particularly nasty video above of an attack on a videographer at Occupy Oakland.

Hand-in-hand with the media attachment to the “extreme” line from the police, the PA and Evening Standard’s use of the “hijacked by anarchists” cliche and references to the trouble at last year’s student protests, we have a nice little attempt to sow fear among protesters.