"Despised...Why the Modern Left Loathes the Working Class"

 

I met up last week with a UNISON member and former work colleague. We meet 3-4 times a year for a meal and chat about politics and trade unions. He sent me this book by Paul Embery and we are planning to discuss it next time we meet. I will post further when I have finished reading it. 

I cannot resist linking this review from The Guardian.  https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/08/labour-conservative-values-liberal-left-working-class-voters

"This monstrous glowing orb makes a mockery of east London’s Olympic legacy" Lyn Brown MP

 

When London bid to host the 2012 Olympic Games, we were driven not just by sporting desire, but by a vision for a regenerated east London after decades of deindustrialisation and deprivation. We were promised not just new infrastructure and economic growth, but the opportunity to genuinely improve the lives of local residents, including those who suffered dislocation and disruption to create the new Olympic venues. Most local people passionately supported the bid and the Games on this premise. Yet, while the Games did bring significant investment into Newham, there have been clear failures to benefit local people in the years since the closing ceremonies.

Delivering a lasting, positive legacy for the Olympic site was a job entrusted to the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC), established by Boris Johnson, then mayor of London, with the promise that local people really would benefit from the impact of the Games. For the most part, the opportunities created have remained out of reach for most local people. Rents and living costs have risen rapidly in the area but these have not been matched by sufficient wage increases or enough accessible new jobs, let alone enough affordable and social housing.

As the local MP, I have always made the case that new developments must meet local needs. Almost a decade on from 2012, I don’t think the LLDC has lived up to that promise. And, while the corporation has failed to deliver the positive changes that local residents need, I believe it is also removing the ability of local residents and their elected councils to have an effective say about what gets built in their communities.

A case in point is the MSG Sphere in Stratford. The LLDC’s planning committee meets soon to decide the fate of the planning application for this giant orb-shaped music venue from the Madison Square Garden company. The site was originally public land that was sold to developers with the idea of creating new workspaces and homes, a fitting vision for the positive legacy of the Games. Instead, what we now face is a massive live entertainment venue, almost as tall as Big Ben, covered with nearly a million garish LEDs, programmed to display videos and adverts. The company behind the concept owns Madison Square Garden in New York, and clearly has little connection to Newham’s communities.

I have had serious concerns for some time about the value of this proposed development, the degree of community consent it has involved and the harm it may do to people in Stratford and neighbouring areas. Newham doesn’t want this venue, yet it’s the LLDC, not Newham council, that gets to recommend to Sadiq Khan whether it is built. I don’t believe that’s fair or right.

Many local residents have clear and serious objections to the light and noise pollution this development would cause, as well as the potential for increased antisocial behaviour and traffic. The giant venue will beam bright lights into the surrounding area until 11pm on some days; beginning again at 6am or 7am, depending on the time of year. One constituent has predicted that it will be like living next to the surface of the sun. Many residents feel that living next to the site will be a nightmare.

The planning application has proposed that the MSG Sphere would host 300 events a year, a number far higher than the venues that already exist nearby, such as the London Stadium. It will undoubtedly be noisy and disruptive. Yet there is no qualified professional assessment of the effects that noise, light, moving images and distracting advertising will have on the environment and local people, including vulnerable groups and children.

Does London really need a gigantic glowing orb the height of Big Ben?

Read more

Crowd management issues could be equally serious. The planning application includes a vague operational manual for how the venue might function, rather than a transparent, detailed and binding plan for impacts on the local area and transport system. And there’s currently no commitment to cooperate with other big venues, such as the London Stadium and the O2, to avoid overwhelming the Jubilee tube line and other local transport.

MSG’s planning application was submitted more than two years ago, in March 2019. The public consultation that has taken place since then has certainly been lengthy, but for many people, that doesn’t make it adequate. There has been a drip-feed of extremely complex, technical submissions with more than 2,000 separate documents and representations available online. The enormous scale of the submission has created huge barriers for residents, many of whom have had difficulty accessing the relevant information, properly understanding the implications or making an informed, democratic decision.

Newham’s residents have little power over the final outcome; Newham council only gets two representatives on the LLDC’s planning committee out of a total of 12 members, including seven unelected committee members. I’m calling on the LLDC to refuse the application and protect Newham’s residents from yet another inappropriate development. I would hope they would listen to and act on what elected representatives say. Securing some of the promised benefits of the Olympic legacy depends upon it.

• Lyn Brown is the Labour member of parliament for West Ham  (hat tip Guardian & Cllr Terry Paul).

Labour and TUC call for ‘fire and rehire’ ban as part of new work vision

 End of lockdown a chance for people to reassert control, say Frances O’Grady and Angela Rayner

People will have an opportunity to wrest back control over their working lives when the country emerges from the pandemic, but the government must do more to help by immediately outlawing practices such as ‘fire and rehire’, prominent trade union and political figures have said.

Frances O’Grady, the head of the Trades Union Congress (TUC), and the new shadow secretary of state for the future of work, Angela Rayner, called for a reset in the relationships between employers and staff as they each set out visions for the future of work.

“The pandemic has raised these pretty profound questions about our values and it’s held up a mirror to Britain on inequalities that were there long before, but have been magnified by it,” O’Grady said.

“It is a chance for us to say: ‘Do we really think it’s right that all the risk is on the shoulder of the workers and that people who do the most valuable work very often get paid the least?’”

Rayner attacked the government for failing to deliver the promised employment bill that ministers had indicated would secure the rights workers have enjoyed during the UK’s membership of the EU, saying its absence “exposes the gaping hole between Tory rhetoric and action”.

She said: “Coming out of this pandemic, there is an urgent need for stronger employment rights and protections, yet without a bill the inequality and injustice that exists in our economy as a result of the Tories’ failure to protect working people will only get worse.”

Millions of people have seen fundamental changes to the way they work during the pandemic and that has led many to reassess how they want to work in future – as well as how they value the work of others.

There was widespread condemnation of government plans to offer only a 1% pay rise to NHS staff in England this year. And there are calls to broaden the definition of key worker to include, for example, the supermarket staff who helped keep a locked-down country fed – and to give them priority access to cheaper housing, as well as a living wage and better working conditions.

“If we really want to thank key workers, show that through their pay packets,” O’Grady said.

Key in any revision of the way the country works, O’Grady said, must be to increase and broaden statutory sick pay, which she said has proven insufficient to allow people on low pay to self-isolate for the good of the public.

For years, the government had identified a pandemic as one of the biggest risks facing the UK. National security would be threatened by maintaining statutory sick pay at a level that did not allow everyone to self-isolate if needed, the TUC’s head warned.

O’Grady said she was optimistic people would use the experience of the past year to assert greater control over their working lives, stressing that the focus would need to extend far beyond simply allowing city-based office workers to work from home.

People in all types of workplaces could benefit from being able to fit work around their lives, including by gaining the right to regular hours, more job-sharing and flexi-time, as well as greater freedom to swap shifts, she said.

O’Grady added: “The trick is realising we can only do that collectively. And that’s the challenge, which I’m optimistic about.” While she called on workers to use the trade union movement to help win such rights, both O’Grady and Rayner said the government had a major role to play.

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said it was “committed to protecting and enhancing workers’ rights”. A spokesperson added: “In the past year alone, we have taken vigorous action, from introducing parental bereavement leave, to protecting new parents on furlough, to giving millions a pay rise through a higher minimum wage.”

However, the minimum wage is still well below what campaigners say is needed when measured against the cost of living.

The spokesperson added: “The government is committed to bringing forward an employment bill to further protect and enhance workers’ rights to build a high skilled, high productivity, high wage economy that delivers on our ambition to make the UK the best place in the world to work and grow a business.”

But Labour’s deputy leader cited the example of fire and rehire, under which staff are forced to accept worse conditions in order to keep their jobs, as one area where ministers must do more, calling it an “appalling and bullying practice”. The prime minister has denounced it as unacceptable but Rayner demanded that he “outlaw it without any further delay”.

She added: “For years, many companies have used bogus self-employment to deny their workers sick pay, annual leave and other basic protections, in arrangements that are specially designed so companies can dodge their legal and moral responsibility to treat their staff with dignity and respect.”

Both women agreed that the shared experience of the pandemic should be the catalyst for fundamental change".

Hat tip The Guardian

"Social housing report calls for massive overhaul of tenants’ rights Renters need better deal to prevent another Grenfell disaster, says the Social Housing Commission"

Completely agree.  Tenants have no collective voice, little power and very mixed protection. While the public sector is not at all perfect the private sector needs complete fundamental reform. 

"Sweeping new powers must be given to social tenants as part of an overhaul needed to ensure a Grenfell-style disaster never happens again, a powerful cross-party commission will warn this week.

It found that social tenants are being failed by a system that leaves them waiting an average of eight months before their complaints are investigated, even when their safety could be at risk.

The calls for a once-in-a-generation rethink of tenants’ rights come from the Social Housing Commission, a year-long investigation brought together by the charity Shelter following the Grenfell Tower fire in which 72 people died. Its commissioners include the former Labour leader Ed Miliband, the Conservative former cabinet minister Sayeeda Warsi and the campaigner Doreen Lawrence, whose son Stephen was murdered in a racist attack in 1993. Lawrence said few people in positions of power “understand what this experience [being a social tenant] is like”.

Get Society Weekly: our newsletter for public service professionals

 

Read more

“I doubt they’ve ever had to live in poor housing or know what it is like to feel invisible, like no one cares,” she said. “The case for investing in social housing is overwhelming. We cannot solve the housing crisis without it, but the system must be made more responsive to tenants at the same time.”

The commission is demanding a regulator with similar muscle to the body set up in the aftermath of the financial crisis to fix a system that has left social tenants feeling ignored or branded as troublemakers for raising serious concerns. The panel is also calling for a “significant expansion” of new social housing as well as comprehensive changes to the way the sector is run. The commission has spent a year researching the housing emergency, with 31,000 people responding to its consultation exercise.

One of the main findings is how the current regulatory system is failing social renters. In 2017-18 the average time taken for a decision by the housing ombudsman was eight months. Deep frustrations were expressed to the commission by both private renters and those in social-rented accommodation. The commission’s full report is published on Tuesday".

Hat tip Guardian

"Punk Corbyn" West Ham delegate at Labour Party Conference 2017

My fellow ward Councillor, John Whitworth, was our elected West Ham CLP delegate for our National Labour Party Conference this year.  Check out this page for his detailed report on conference as our CLP delegate.

http://www.johnslabourblog.org/p/labourparty-conference-2017-report-of.html

(apologies for the formatting)

Picture of John from a previous conference when The Guardian fashion team featured him and other Labour activists. They described him in these terms :-

"Whitworth’s shades and anarcho-syndicalist beard suggests Punk Corbyn".

Love it :)

Labour NEC asked to inquire into Newham mayoral 'trigger ballot'

On the whole a fair article but it does not report on the complaints of many members that this ballot was rigged.

The Guardian Dave Hill on London "Nearly 50 party members in the east London borough want their national ruling body to examine claims that the process for reselecting Sir Robin Wales was flawed

Labour Party members in Newham unhappy with the “affirmative nomination” process that saw the borough’s directly-elected mayor Sir Robin Wales declared the narrow winner of a “trigger ballot” to decide whether he should automatically go forward as their party’s mayoral candidate next year have sent a 13-page letter to Labour’s national executive Committee (NEC) asking it to establish a “full inquiry” into what it claims were “many failures of process/propriety and procedural irregularities” that took place on the way to the outcome and to halt the confirmation of Sir Robin as 2018 candidate until such an inquiry is complete.

Signed by 47 members of the east London borough’s two constituency Labour parties (CLPs), including ten Newham councillors, the letter sets out at length its case that “a number of [individual] ballots should be declared void or held in abeyance” and that the conduct of the process, which ran from 25 October to 4 December 2016, “made a material difference to the result”, tipping it in favour of Sir Robin by 20 votes to 17.

The trigger ballot offered a two-way choice between voting “yes” to Sir Robin being re-selected unchallenged as his party’s candidate for the next mayoral election to seek fifth consecutive term in a post he first won in its inaugural year of 2002, and voting “no” to that so that an open contest to become the candidate would be held instead.

Each of the 20 electoral ward Labour branches in Newham’s two CLPs, East Ham and West Ham, had one vote in the ballot and a further 17 votes were cast by Labour-affiliated organisations, most of them trade unions. Of the 20 wards, 11 voted “no”, meaning they favoured an open selection contest. However, 11 “yes” votes were cast by the 17 affiliates, which got Sir Robin over the finish line.

The letter to Labour’s NEC raises what it calls “three major failings” in the running of the ballot process, concerning the differing numbers of votes cast by different unions “because of a different interpretation of the rules”, the conduct of individual balloting and “conflicts of interest between the different roles of those charged with the management of the process”.

The results as published show that the GMB union cast four votes, the CWUand Unite two, while the four other unions involved – TSSA, BECTU, USDAW and Unison - cast one each. All four GMB votes were “yes” to Sir Robin going forward automatically. Two of the CWU’s votes were “yes” and the third was “no”. Other “yes” votes came from USDAW, BECTU and TSSA. Both Unite votes were for the “no” side, as was Unison’s.

The letter asks that the single votes of two other affiliated organisations “be held in abeyance and not counted”, including that of Newham Fabians which voted “yes”. The Fabian Society nationally has confirmed that it is still “seeking further information” from its Newham branch and has received “a number of complaints” that the correct trigger ballot procedure was not followed. The NEC is also requested to look into the way three of the ward “yes” votes were arrived at. Two of these wards reached their decision on the strength of a majority of just one member.

A source close to Sir Robin has denied that the ballot process or its outcome are questionable and a spokesperson for the London Labour Party said: “The Labour Party does not comment on internal selections but the process in Newham was carried out in line with established rules and procedures.” The national Labour Party has not responded to a request to confirm that the NEC has received the letter and whether it will be addressing the matter. The next full meeting of the NEC is on Tuesday.

Newham is exceptional in that all 60 of its councillors as well as its mayor are Labour, leading to jokes by other London politicians about the borough becoming a one-party state, but also to complaints among some local members that Sir Robin has been in the job too long and become difficult to hold to account. However, the letter says that if he is confirmed as the 2018 candidate “as a result of an open and fair re-selection process, we and other members would all support (in full and without equivocation) his candidacy”.

"It’s a man’s world" Mayoral Elections

Not sure that blaming trade unions for an Executive Mayor macho culture is fair? Especially in unions such as Unison whose membership, officers and activist base are predominately female but this article does makes some valid points.

"The Guardian’s Helen Pidd asks why mayoral elections, especially in the new “metro” areas, are being dominated by men – specifically among the Labour Party.

Liberal Democrat Sue Derbyshire, former leader of Stockport Council, thinks that Labour's rooting in the world of trade unions has led to a "macho" culture that favours bruising election battles: "It creates a male-oriented way of doing things. Women often do things differently.”

Jean Stretton, leader of Oldham Council – the only female of 10 leaders in Greater Manchester's constituent councils, comments: "When I first became a councillor in 2003, frequently the only other woman at a meeting would be taking the minutes. Now… Things are definitely changing for the better. It will just take time for those changes to filter up to the top."

The Guardian, G2, Page: 14,15"

"The loans that have left councils impoverished and saddled with debt"

Check out this article on Friday in The Guardian about Housing Associations and Councils which have been ripped off by the Banks over the toxic LOBO loans they were mis-sold. I have an obvious interest and concern in both organisations.

This is a national disgrace but since there are time limits on possible legal action we all need to act quickly. Sticking your head in the sand and doing nothing is not an option.

Councils and Housing Associations need to join up together to sue the banks and advisors.
 
"What looked like an attractive deal has been catastrophic for many social landlords and local authorities - and it’s the people at the bottom who suffer...

For many councils and housing associations, the wolf is at the door. In Spanish and Portuguese, lobo is one word for the fearsome canine. It’s fitting then, that the latest instrument of predatory capitalism to attract attention – lender option borrower option agreements – are called lobo loans for short.

The loans, typically long-term from 40 to 70 years, were taken up by as many as 63% of local authorities in the UK, as a way of funding services post-recession. For housing associations, many considered lobo loans the only funding option given the shrinking of grants: the less stable associations had committed to development contracts, but were starved of cash.

But there’s a catch: there’s always a catch. The terms may have looked attractive, but for a reason. Many local authorities took a gamble when taking out lobo loans: if base interest rates rose (and most people assumed they would), they’d get a good deal. But they didn’t rise, and many local authorities didn’t get a good deal.

And, as the name suggests, the loan terms aren’t set in stone: the lender’s option could be to hike fixed rates at predetermined dates where they are permitted to alter the loan facility. The borrower’s option is to accept that rate, or repay the loan.

In 2009, 30 housing associations took out lobos after the financial industry took to selling them to local authorities and social landlords on an industrial scale. Borrowers thought that they were insuring themselves against possible high interest rates, but the derivatives built into the loans meant that the costs were linked to market performance, so borrowers actually pay more when rates fall.

Now, the likelihood of housing associations building more, while saddled with so much debt, is looking unlikely and local authorities have essentially shot themselves in the foot.
Newham council, the Financial Times reports, took out 27 loans at a face value of £563m. The latest fair value of the loans now puts them at £959m, with interest rates in excess of 7% on some loans.

The Evening Standard reports Thames Valley Housing in London has had to renegotiate the terms of its loans, and many borrowers are facing renegotiation or the prospect of paying high break fees, all of which essentially pour council taxpayers’ and tenants’ cash down the plughole.

What looked like an attractive deal has been catastrophic for many social landlords and local authorities - and at a time when councils are facing cuts at a level not seen for a generation, and housing associations are struggling to build homes and are being battered by cuts.

The loans should never have been sold: they are extremely complex financial instruments, and pricing them is far beyond the capabilities of housing associations and local authorities. But also, the use of derivatives by local authorities is potentially unlawful, and has been since the 1989 Hammersmith and Fulham swaps case. Council leaders and MPs have written to Andrew Tyrie, chair of the Treasury select committee calling for an investigation into potential mis-selling.

Treasury guidance stipulates that “public sector organisations may borrow from private sector sources only if the transaction delivers better value for money for the Exchequer as a whole.” It’s difficult to see how the lobo loans scandal has done anything more than impoverish housing associations and local authorities, while once again lining the pockets of certain large banks.

The most dispiriting point is this: the financial industry has learned nothing from the crash. For a brief period when the global economy melted down in 2008, many people genuinely believed the industry would be forced to change.

Unregulated, it was left to package up toxic bonds and brag about excess. Surely, governments would impose regulation, and a cowed banking sector would follow suit and rein in the excesses that had caused banks to blow up? Neither happened. So, yet again, we find ourselves facing a financial crisis, this time in local authority and housing finance, and rather than see a resolution, we’ll just see the people at the bottom suffer".

"UK’s housing crisis will only be made worse by this bill"

This letter was published in The Guardian today.
 
The housing and planning bill currently before parliament will make the housing crisis worse. It sets out to reduce the number of genuinely affordable homes, and encourage even more property speculation. Extending right to buy to housing association tenants will be paid for by selling off “high value” council homes on the open market, with no guarantee that homes sold will be replaced.

Council and housing association tenants with a family income over £30,000 (£40,000 in London) will be pushed to pay market rents, driving many from their homes and destroying mixed communities.

On new sites, developers can increase profits by providing publicly subsidised “starter homes” for a few instead of homes for rent. Travellers will have even less chance of a site or mooring; waiting lists will get longer. The bill has nothing but token words to help millions suffering the unaffordable rents, constant threat of eviction and substandard conditions of private renting.

The UK desperately needs a national housing strategy based on investment for need, not greed. There are thousands of acres of publicly owned land that can be used to build a new generation of energy-efficient council homes, cutting rents, and creating job and training opportunities.

We call on MPs, local councils and housing associations to link with tenants and trade unions in a growing alliance of opposition to this bill, join local protests on 5 December and demand instead the homes we need.

Eileen Short Defend Council Housing
Betsy Dilner Generation Rent
John McDonnell MP Shadow chancellor
Caroline Lucas MP
Tyger Benbow-Jones Chair, Welsh Tenants Federation
Sandra Ogden and Roderick Morgan Leeds Tenants Federation
Mary Jacques RotherFed
John Townend Barnsley Federation
Maxine Edwards Kirklees Federation
Jimmy Devlin North West Tenants and Residents Assembly
Marcus Trower National Bargee Travellers Association
Debby Kennett London Gypsy and Traveller Unit
Jon Clempner Leader, Harlow Council
Lewis Herbert Leader, Cambridge City Council
Kevin Price Executive councillor for housing, Cambridge City Council
Christine Blower General secretary, National Union of Teachers
Dave Prentis General secretary, Unison
Paul Kenny General secretary, GMB
Gail Cartmail Assistant general secretary, Unite
Phil Sedler Chair, Tower Hamlets Tenants Federation
John Marais Tenant rep Cambridge
John Gray Newham councillor, Unison national executive
Paul Kershaw Chair, Unite LE1111 housing branch
Liz Brennan Cambridge Unison
Jim Board Doncaster Unison

Hat tip picture to Shelter emergency Christmas appeal

The West Ham 3 Johns at work - Punk John, Chic John and ? John

Busy Saturday. First, was Councillor Surgery at Brasset Point Tenants & Residents Room (had a tricky planning "Stop Notice" issue); then memorial tribute to PC Nina MacKay followed by ward "walkabout" in Dirleton Road E15 with concerned residents (and they have every right to be concerned about issues we came across).

In the afternoon I went to help out at West Ham Labour Party HQ in High Street, Stratford. Following a roof repair and leaking water tank problem we have an enormous amount of wood, chipboard, trunking, broken furniture and other debris to clear up and prepare for removal tomorrow.

My comrades John Whitworth and John Saunders (left and right) were recently described by "The Guardian" fashion page as "Punk Corbynistas" and "Chic Corbynistas". I wonder what they would have made of me and my Philosophy Football "The cuts won't work" tee shirt? It was hard work but fun smashing up planks of wood so they will fit into the van.

In the right of picture you can see the 100 boxes of "Sadiq Khan for Mayor of London leaflets" for West Ham CLP. We picked up the leaflets for West Ham and Custom House wards. If you can help deliver these leaflets in your local ward then contact your branch secretary.

Hat tip photo Rokhsana.

West Ham Corbynistas Fashion Gurus

This brilliant photo was today featured in The Guardian's fashion page  "Get the Jeremy Corbyn look". My fellow West Ham ward Councillor, John Whitworth, (left) is shown standing next to former Newham Councillor (and Labour Party activist) John Saunders. The photo was taken outside the Labour Party conference in Brighton on Monday, where the both of them had been handing out literature to delegates from the left supporting "Campaign for Labour Party Democracy" (CLPD).

This is the caption  "The two Johns – Saunders and Whitworth – are everything you would expect from proud Corbynistas: grey-bearded, casual-jacketed and profoundly political. With the cravat and finer shades of blue, Saunders is Chic Corbyn, while Whitworth’s shades and anarcho-syndicalist beard suggests Punk Corbyn". 

Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian

Update: The two John's enjoy their moment of fashion fame at our  West Ham Ward meeting yesterday :)



 

"Unison has done so much for working women"

UNISON's President Wendy Nichols has responded below to a bizarre (and "untrue") attack on the union in the Guardian last week. 

When I think of all the very strong and influential women in UNISON the idea that they are being "side lined" is frankly laughable.  

"Women do indeed make up three-quarters of Unison’s membership, but far from being a union whose “upper echelons continue to be dominated by men” (The Labour movement sidelines women all the time, 12 September), women play an active part, including throughout its top tier. Three out of the five assistant general secretaries are women. Two-thirds of Unison’s presidential team are female, as they are every year, because of rules steered through by Dave Prentis, when he was deputy general secretary at the time of the union’s creation. 

Two-thirds of the NEC, Unison’s governing body, are women, as they are on all the other committees that shape the direction of the union. Similarly, eight out of Unison’s 12 regions are headed by women. 

Not bad going for a union whose leader apparently sees gender issues as “divisive”.

Unison has always stood up for women, not only those who are members, but women in wider society too. For example, it’s Unison that is challenging the government’s employment tribunal fees, which have led to a virtual collapse in sex and maternity discrimination claims. The union is now taking its fight to the supreme court to make sure that all women are able to confront workplace injustice.

Given the insidious rise in sexism and misogyny in our society, Deborah Orr might have been better placed speaking to someone like myself who knows just how much Unison has done for working women. Then she might have been able to mention the positive measures that have been promoted by Unison under Dave Prentis’s leadership, instead of denigrating them.

Wendy Nichols
President, Unison"

Update: Check out this Unisonactive post http://unisonactive.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/women-in-unison.html for more stuff on Women in Unison

Leftier than thou

Lovely. hat tip Guardian 

The "undoing of Ed Miliband"? History will tell and why we really lost the election

This article here is a media hatchet job. Typical Guardian sneers and bile.

The truth is that we were never going to win. The defeat in 2010 was so massive that it would take more than 5 years to overcome.

Credit to Ed for keeping the Party together and making us credible. In 2020 voters will not give the Tories the benefit of the doubt again.

Yesterday evening we had a far reaching discussion at West Ham Ward meeting about the result and the future of the Party.  Afterwards we carried on these discussions with colleagues from different wards.  These were my views :-  

• Share of Vote for Labour in 2010 was 29%. The worse result since 1922.

• There has only been once in 100 years a one term British Government (and that was February 1974 after the 1973 Oil crisis, coal strike and 3 day week)

• Nationalism in Scotland and fear of SNP amongst floating Tory voters

• Ruthless Tory Party machine decimates Liberals & attacks our financial record

• It was an international crisis but the economic crash in 2008 took place on Labour's watch. 

• It is too slow, patchy and uneven but we are finally coming out of recession

• Wages are starting to rise, inflation is very low, unemployment down and house prices high

• Who could have predicted the collapse in energy markets - it's  now 25% cheaper to fill up my car

• as always in British politics "its the economy stupid". 

"Six myths about how the unions are ruining Britain"

"Don't believe everything you read about the trade unions – particularly if it's in the Daily Mail" Top article by Guardian columnist Ellie Mae O'Hagan.

I particularly like the myth "The unions do nothing for ordinary people" and her response "Actually this one's true. Except for paid holidays, the eight-hour day, paid sick leave, bringing an end to child labour, fighting for equal pay, better health and safety regulation, fighting workplace discrimination, the unions have done absolutely nothing".

Great British Rip Off

Last month I went to the "Great British Rip Off" debate at the House of Commons. Sponsored by "Unions Together"; "Class" and the Parliamentary "Trade Union Group".

The excellent Katy Clark MP, from Trade Union Group of MPs Chaired (apologies for not getting her into picture!).

Zoe Williams from the Guardian was the first to speak (2nd left - another useless photo by me). She thought tonight that she was speaking to the converted on why inequality is "bad" but she doesn't understand why the Tories don't get that despite the economy picking up on GDP, inequality is still growing? Wages have not gone up since 2003. 

There is 500k "self employed" who are not really employed but playing the benefit system and then another 500k on insecure "0 hour" contracts, then 150k on unpaid placements.  People are not being paid enough. They cannot buy enough. There is not enough demand and ideology is hamstringing the economy.

Tories would rather have a weak economy than free collective bargaining,

Even a living wage for all will not solve housing crisis. Housing is not affordable even on a high wage. So many cannot afford housing then something radical may actually happen. Solution is collective bargaining, land tax and collective housing provision.

Next was Sadiq Khan MP who agreed that we have seen a Great British Rip off in recent years. The most wealthy have increased their wealth while the poorest have become even poorer. 28% of Londoners live in poverty despite 60% of them being in work. 

In his constituency of Tooting he has many houses worth £1 million plus but it also has food banks.The last Labour government spent money on improving the housing stock but did not spend enough on building new homes. A future Labour government will build 200,000 new homes per year by the end of its term.

Sadiq noted that in most successful countries there is more collective bargaining over pay (I will ignore the silly interpretation that a branch of the stupid Party online made about his comments)

Matthew Pennycook, the Prospective Parliamentary candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich was next. He reminded us that for the first time, the majority of people in poverty were in work. Since the election the average family is worse off by £1600 per year. Stagnant wages have caused a massive cost of living crisis.

A living wage is part of the solution but not the silver bullet. We also need affordable child care and (real) affordable rents.

Final speaker was the General Secretary of the TUC, Frances O'Grady. 

Frances asked for not a plaster but to address the root cause of poverty. Which is giving Billions to subsidise poverty wages to employers who can afford to pay more. We need a fair share of wealth in this country and a right to bargain. We need wage councils or "Fair Pay" councils (whatever you want to call it) who can work on the whole pay package.

We need a new economy, a  fair economy and in tribute to the RMT trade union leader, Bob Crow who died recently, we need greater public ownership. 

Frances finished by quoting Docker trade union leader (and former Newham Labour Councillor) Vic Turner, who when asked what trade unionism is all about answered "its about working class people looking after each other".

(usual disclaimer about the absolute accuracy of my hurried note-taking)

"Benefit cuts put frontline housing staff in danger"

A good article in Guardian Housing network page.  Except Councils and Housing Associations shouldn't just wring their hands about the obvious and foreseeable increased risks to their staff .

They should be actively consulting with staff and trade unions on revised risk assessments and violence at work procedures.

Health and Safety enforcement agencies (the HSE for Councils and Councils for Housing Associations) should also be making sure that staff safety is being taken seriously.

Housing managers do not realise that they face imprisonment and unlimited fines for serious breaches of health and safely laws (and that they could even lose their homes since the employer and insurance providers cannot pay such fines).

"Housing providers have become de facto enforcers of many benefit cuts and are finding themselves at greater at risk of harm.
 
The recent shooting of a housing association employee and bailiff during an eviction should be of real concern to housing providers, and a reminder that our frontline workers often have to deal with the consequences of policies created in Westminster.

Reform of our welfare system was long overdue, but the pursuit of savage cuts is having a profound impact. Housing associations are well-placed to understand and explain the real effects of welfare reform in action. This is an important part of our role; acting as advocates for our customers, many of whom are not able to speak out for themselves, is one of the ways in which we can influence policy and support social justice.

Benefit cuts are putting many people in severe debt and, as that debt is often owed to their landlord, an increase in evictions is inevitable.

Housing providers are not the authors of these policies, nor their advocates, but have become the de facto enforcers of the new regime, and it's our colleagues who are having to bear the consequences of people's anger.

'Why are you doing this to me?'

At Curo housing association, our money management adviser has had several meetings recently with tenants in tears who, faced with benefit cuts and caps, don't know how they will pay their rent or clear their existing rent arrears. A question often asked is: "Why are you doing this to me?"
The adviser told me: "In my experience, the tenant will pay the creditor who shouts the loudest, leaving shortfalls elsewhere to cover the rest of essential household expenditure."

As housing associations do not chase debts as aggressively as payday lenders, banks or mobile phone companies, rent arrears can build up as tenants fail to prioritise rent payment when faced with threatening notices from others.

We will do all we can for customers who turn to us for help, but we also have to deal with the realities of running a business and have a responsibility to safeguard the financial viability of our organisations, for the sake of all our customers and for those who will need affordable homes in the future. Evictions are an inevitable consequence of the welfare reforms, and it is our staff who come face to face with the backlash.

We're dealing with rising numbers of people wishing to move, increased arrears and greater demand for debt advice. On an individual level, where the real story is, we're seeing greater levels of anxiety and stress as people, many of them vulnerable, try to cope with serious hardship.

We are concerned for those who are really struggling to make ends meet, but also concerned for our own frontline staff who put themselves at risk of harm through their association with policies they had no part in forming.

Victor da Cunha is chief executive of Curo housing association".

Chartered Institute Housing Election 2012

I've just taken part in the first ever election for the Vice President of the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH). You get a email with a unique security code and you cast your vote on-line at the independent Electoral Reform
Services website.

The Vice President will become the President of the CIH next year. It's a bit suspect that this is the first ever openly contested election at the CIO but better late than never I suppose. I posted here that I know one of the candidates, Jan Taranczuk, quite well (his wife Kathy use to be my Tower Hamlets Local Housing office boss for many years). I don't know his opponent, Paul Tennant, who is the CEO of Orbit Housing Association.

If you are a member of the CIH you have until 30 January to vote. You can see their election statements here. There is an online husting tomorrow 12pm on the Guardian Housing Network blog. This afternoon on the Inside Housing site here there is a online poll (see picture right: double click to bring up detail) and both Jan and Paul were running neck and neck at 50%.

UNISON NDC 2011: Guardian Focus Podcast "Unions Strike back".

This Guardian audio podcast was posted yesterday here.  The first 10 minutes were recorded on Tuesday morning at UNISON conference.

First they interviewed Karen Jennings (Head of UNISON Health), then me (Head of ums and uhs), Anne McCormack (Further Education), Monica Hirst (London Nurse), Mike Davey (London Nurse) and James Anthony (Birmingham nurse).

I think that (apart from me naturally) they gave a very good account of themselves and the reasons why UNISON members will go out on strike, if necessary, to defend their pensions.  They made calm but committed, articulate, logical and proportionate arguments.  No shouting, ranting or unintelligible sloganising.

This is the sort of modern, thoughtful trade unionism that will help win this dispute (...and drive the Tory tabloid gutter press bonkers with frustration).