choose yes. - WordPress.com...choose yes. 2014 choose to stay part of the Uk. choose trident nuclear weapons on your doorstep. choose zero hours contracts. choose the bedroom tax

Bedroom Tax: we must burythis vicious Tory attack onthe poor, sick and disabled

• see page 16£1 • issue 430 • 17th - 30th January 2014facebook.com/scottishsocialistvoice

Alan Bissett: on why thecomfortable lead of theNo campaign is shrinking

• see page 3

facebook.com/ScottishSocialistVoice @ssv_voice

torystoppingchoose yes.

2014

choose to stay part of the Uk. choose tridentnuclear weapons on your doorstep. choose zerohours contracts. choose the bedroom tax. choosewelfare to work. choose anti-trade union laws.choose fat cat profiteers. choose to attack ‘thesomething for nothing culture’ while you create taxbreaks for the rich. choose to celebrate the ‘just’slaughter of the first world war. choose no housingbenefit for people under 25. choose to blame thepoor for the financial crisis. choose atos...

choosea future

From the makers ofshallow Politics

#2#1 #3 #4 #5cameron

rennie

sick boy darling

davidson

lamont

EDITORIAL

2 • Scottish Socialist Voice • issue 430

by Ken Ferguson

AS WE enter the decisivestage of the campaign for aYes vote capable of openingthe way to a Scotlandworking for the interests of itspeople rather than a bunch ofbloated city fat cats we needto be clear that this will be abattle about power. And nobody is more aware

of that fact than the web oflegal, royal, political, militaryand financial interests whichdominate the British stateunder the title of the“establishment”. This nexus of power and

wealth which exists toguarantee business as usualfor the wealthy minorityunderpins the desperatedetermination to defeatScottish independence andpreserve the existing order. For them the dangers

posed by a Yes vote such asloss of bases for their nuclearweapons, possible evictionfrom the UN security counciland lost oil revenues whileimportant are less so than theprospect of the defeat of aBritish state fashioned,organised and run to servetheir needs. They will use all means at

their disposal to avoid thatdefeat and independencecampaigners need tounderstand this.

Half truthsSo far their chosen weapon

the cross class BetterTogether has run months ofscares and half truths fromslower broadband to borderposts in a frantic attempt toavoid serious debate aboutthe real issues. Of inestimable value in this

has been to role played by“Scottish” Labour as the frontman for a British state whichis dominated by Tory ideasirrespective who occupiesDowning Street. Thespectacle of Alistair Darling

being cheered by ScottishTories who are universallydetested by Scots voters andthe decision by Labour to voteagainst free school meals iseloquent testimony of theconsequences of sharing abed, and political desires,withTories and the wannabeTories of the Lib Dems. No wonder that their is a

growing list of sickenedformer Labour loyalistscoming out for Yes and agrowing Labour campaign toback them. However if Yes backers

needed a reminder of the subgutter depths that the Britishstate will go to then they

need look no further than thereleased cabinet papers fromthe Thatcher regime 30 yearsago. Few on the left will besurprised that theThatcherites stockpiled coalbefore provoking a miners’strike or that despite denialsat the time the did have a hitlist of pits to close. Nor is it a surprise that they

planned massive spendingcuts on anti-Tory Scotland onlybacking away when the likelypolitical price became clear. What the papers do tell us

is that the British state, ablyassisted by a supine medialied barefacedly to voters andran a campaign of repression

and lies against the miners inorder to defeat what theybranded “the enemy within”. They did the same – with

help not just from the mediabut also Labour leader NeilKinnock – to progressivecouncils such as the GLCand Liverpool daring tooppose them. The central lesson that Yes

campaigners must draw issimple but vital: the“honourable gentlemen”backing the British state lieand connive to defeat theirenemies and right now theYes campaign tops that list.

Serial liarsFrom lies about going into

the 1914 imperialist slaughterto defend “gallant littleBelgium” to Blair’s Iraq horrorhunt of non-existent WMD,these are serial offenders. However set against the

power of media and moneydriving the No campaign weneed to mobilise the voices ofthe Scottish people –particularly the working classmajority – behind a Yes vote. That can break their

centuries old regime of powerand privilege and shape aScotland meeting the needsand aspirations of the vastmajority of Scots for realchange. The battle will be intense

but the prize priceless.

Unionists backBritish statesteeped in lies

YOU’RE A TORY, DARLING: Alistair rallying his Tory troops

ALAN BISSETT

issue 430 • Scottish Socialist Voice • 3

by Alan Bissett

HERE WE are at the start of Scotland’sgreat, historic year: 2014, everything build-ing towards the watershed referendum on14 September. The No campaign, so longused to a comfortable lead, are feeling theirsupport steadily melt as more people startto question the supposed ‘strength’ and ‘se-curity’ of the UK. The positive case has been made forciblyby the Yes campaign. Our Unionist mediaconcede this, even as they amplify the Nocampaign’s attacks on our aspirations. Whathas given the Yes campaign momentumlately is the effect of more and more votersweighing a new start for Scotland againstwhat’s on offer from the Better Togethercampaign: precisely nothing. If a voter is identifying at this stage as a‘Don’t Know’ – and there are enough ofthem to swing the balance – it means that in-dependence to them is a vaguely attractivebut evanescent concept, well-intentioned,but too much of an unknown in comparisonto the familiar here and now of Britain.

Right wing agendaThe Unionist parties have tried to play tothis feeling, by using ‘stability’ of the pound,of defence, of economic size as their mainselling-point. But even some No voters arestarting to see this as yet another mask for aright-wing agenda. It should become the taskof those in favour of independence to makeWestminster’s future for Scotland clear. We must alert working people to reality: ourindustry, labour and resources have been cata-strophically mismanaged by successive UKgovernments, in hoc to the whims of big busi-ness, to our long-term detriment. Our oil – the vast extent of which was hiddenfrom us by successive Tory and Labour gov-ernments – was used by Margaret Thatcher tounderwrite the welfare bill caused by her van-dalism of the UK economy. Scots found our-selves facing the indignity of having our ownoil wealth used by a government we didn’t votefor to decimate our industry. The eventual result can be now witnessed inthe opening of food banks in Glasgow, a loom-ing homelessness crisis, rocketing energy costsand widespread poverty. Not only have the To-

ries, Labour and the Lib Dems shown no willin dealing with these problems, each has exac-erbated them when in power. The pro-independence parties of the ScottishSocialists, the Greens and the SNP, while theydisagree on vision, at least have plans to reversethis decline. The ‘Better Together’ campaign,bankrolled by Tories, corrupt interests andwealthy elites, sees Scotland as a political ir-relevance, a mere supplier of oil receipts to theUK treasury, an exploitable resource or (in thecase of Labour) a source of votes. Retaining the status quo will be the mini-mum of its efforts: the stealth withdrawal ofpowers from Holyrood and cuts to Scotland’sbudget are its true objective. Their threats have been cloaked by a com-pliant media, but various pronouncements fromkey figures have hinted strongly that if Scot-land votes No the status quo is as good as wewill ever have it. After all, we were promisedrewards if we voted No to devolution in 1979.What we received was Thatcherism. Scottish people are not stupid. Our aspira-tions – for ourselves, for our families and forour country – have not been matched reality.We are constantly reminded by the No cam-paign about supposed Britain’s economicmight and prosperity, while our living stan-dards and job security continue to falter. Theindependence movement must not only con-firm that the suspicions of Scots are correct– that only a super-rich minority benefit from

the current UK set-up – but also set out apowerful alternative. Pete Ramand andJames Foley’s forthcoming book Yes: TheRadical Case For Scottish Independence isa very good place to start.

True democracyUnder no illusions about either the Britishstate or the capitalist intentions of the SNP lead-ership, it shows the way ahead for a truedemocracy in which workers and communitiesproperly participate, a nationalised economy,based on Green energy, an oil fund, and a pro-gressive taxation system which ensures that thewealthy – who currently enjoy tax avoidanceat our expense – pay their way. For socialists, we must make clear that in-dependence alone will not solve Scotland’sproblems, as ours will still be a state, like anyother, vulnerable to predatory capitalism.Backed, however, by the active participationof workers and a strong left programme,Scotland can meet this challenge. We could go beyond even the good exam-ple of Nordic social democracy and adopt thesuccessful, co-operative models of runningindustry found in Brazil and the Basque re-gion of Spain, in which profits are reinvestedin the communities which produced them. We have nine months to persuade thepeople of Scotland that the UK economy isirredeemably broken and that a better wayis possible. Let’s make them count.

The No campaign melts as peoplequestion ‘strength’ and ‘security’ of UK

REASONS TO BE CHEERLESS: food banks are now the norm under the unelected Tories

TRANSPORT


by Roz Paterson

HAPPY NEW year to allpublic transport users! Alas,your numbers are dwindling,as new figures show that twothirds of working Scotseschew buses and trains infavour of commuting by car, adepressingly downward trendin public transport usage at atime when the effects ofclimate change are literallyon our doorsteps, and aserious change in travelhabits is urgently required. What could curb our

addiction to the car – amethod of transport that,though costing theenvironment and humanhealth dearly, often works outcheaper than any other formof commute, thanks to thedrop, year on year, in carrunning and ownership costs? How about a rail network

that had stations where weneeded them, fares we couldeasily afford, a timetable thatsuited our needs, and a staffthat were motivated by asense of ownership as wellas public service? A ‘People’sRailway’, in other words. I give you Professor Paul

Salveson, a former railwayguard on the Settle-Carlisleline, now a writer, lecturer, andpolitical activist, dubbed the‘Railway Professor’ for hisinformed and sustainedchampioning of a community-owned and run railway

network. Following his 2013publication, Railpolitik –Bringing Railways back toCommunities, Paul recentlylaunched a report on ScotRail,and its potential as acooperatively-run enterprise.Supported by Aslef, the Co-operative party, and SERA, theSocialist EnvironmentalistResources Association, Paul’sreport advocates thatcommunities, passengers andemployees work together toshape a railway where profitsare reinvested, rather thanhanded out to shareholders,and the network is owned bypassengers/customers, like theCo-op; or by the workers, likethe John Lewis Partnership; orby both, like the Mondragonco-op enterprise in the Basquecountry.

For the peopleFew people are going to

argue with that; some 78 percent, according to a recent Co-operative Party survey, supportthe idea of a railway run in thepeople’s interests, as a publicservice, rather than as abusiness serving rich owners.

Well, apart from theWestminster government, ofcourse, who are ideologicallycommitted to the idea ofprivatisation, even when itflies in the face of the facts. Take the East Coast Main

line, currently run by the state-owned Directly OperatedRailways (DOR), following theemergency decision byNational Express to surrenderthe franchise due to ‘poortrading conditions’ within otherareas of the NE group.

DOR was the ‘operator oflast resort’, yet has managedto generate £800million inprofits since 2009, everypenny of which has gone tothe Treasury. As well as being clearly

competent, having out-performed all previousfranchise-holders, DOR is apopular option withpassengers, with a record-breaking level of customersatisfaction. Yet thegovernment is determined tore-privatise the line, and soon,by the end of 2014 at the latest. Says Paul: “DOR is a crisis

mechanism, and we need amore stable, accountablebody, not run by the UKgovernment but operating at adevolved level.”

Franchise renewalIn other words, let’s not

wait for private franchisees tocrash and burn, but agitatefor something comprehensiveat the outset. Scotland’s rail network

comprises 350 stations,2776km of track, 25 per centof which is electrified, 60 percent commuter, but stretchingto Kyle of Lochalsh, Thursoand Mallaig, and incorporatingsome of the remotest, mostscenic routes in Europe. Paul proposes that the

Scottish Government takecontrol of the ScotRailfranchise when it comes upfor renewal in 2015. As it is a franchise, taking

control would not cost thetax-payer a penny, and wouldprove less expensive thanthe current model, which wassubsidised to the tune of

Is a people’s co-opScotRail possible?

To subscribe, fill in this form and send it to: Scottish Socialist Voice, Suite 370, 4th Floor, Central Chambers, 93 Hope Street, Glasgow G2 6LD.Or telephone: 0781 126 5388Cheques and postal orders should be made payable to ‘Scottish Socialist Voice’Find us on Facebook: facebook.com/scottishsocialistvoice & Twitter: @ssv_voice

Name. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Phone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Emai l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I enclose: g £5 for 5 issues g £10 for 10 issues g £20 for 20 issuesSolidarity rate: g £6 for 5 issues g £12 for 10 issues g £24 for 20 issues

Directly Operated

Railways wasthe ‘operatorof last resort’,yet hasmanaged togenerate£800million inprofits since2009 – everypenny of whichhas gone tothe Treasury

TRANSPORT


£511million in 2013/14,despite the fact that none ofthe subsequent profits foundtheir way into ScottishGovernment coffers. However, Paul is not calling

for a return to the monolithicstate model of British Rail,which was run over theheads of both its employeesand passengers. Despite this, BR did

engender a sense of publicservice amongst its staff,which has never quite goneand which could be revived,Paul believes, at the first whiffof co-operative values ofownership and communityinvolvement/support. If you examine the

converse, for instanceamongst hospital cleaners –formerly NHS workers andnow employed by privately-runoperatives – the sense of pridein their work, and of belonging,is lost, and with it some of thegoodwill and loyaltyengendered by such values. Now look at Lothian Buses,

which remains 100 per centpublicly-owned, theEdinburgh City Councilholding 91 per cent of shares,

the others held by adjoininglocal authorities. It made£8million in profit in 2012,none of which went to privateshareholders, and its focus isnot profits but areas such associal inclusion, and breakingdown barriers to youngpeople using public transport. Once the rail franchise was

restored to public hands, wecould work on devolving itsmanagement to a micro-level,involving workers, passengersand communities.

Community hubsIf the workers are on board,

experience suggests a moremotivated workforce, lessstaff absence, better ideasand more commitment tomaking them workable. If passengers are on board,

you have more users, morefares paid, less traffic on theroad. If communities are onboard, you could havestations that are alsocommunity hubs, with shops,community centres, touristinformation points, and so on. Some of these ideas are

already running, for instancein Beauly, in Inverness-shire,

the station that closed in1960 was re-opened in 2002,and such was the communityresponse that a 75 per centreduction in commuter trafficwas recorded. A decade later, the station

at Conon Bridge was re-opened, to ease congestionon the Kessock Bridge. In itsfirst month, this tiny rural lineoperating a restrictedtimetable saw 2000passenger journeys. In Pitlochry, thanks to

ScotRail’s Adopt-a-Stationscheme, empty stationbuildings now house a thrivingsecond-hand bookshop andcafe, making it a stopping-offpoint for tourists andbibliophiles, as well as awelcome local amenity. Not that such schemes

should be left to voluntarism,which generally favourcommunities that are affluent.Rail management needs toreach out, and draw thecommunity in. Station management could

overlap, for instance, withplanning departments; whyexactly do we not favourhousing developments

around stations and otherpublic transport hubs? In an age of Peak Oil and

climate change, the days ofcar-dependent urban sprawlare surely numbered. If the government of the

day baulks at governmentownership, says Paul, then atleast it could soften up theInvitation to Tender (ITT), byincluding a bias towardssocial benefits, not just‘efficient’ operational costs. To be fair, and Paul likes to

be fair, the SNP’s ITT is animprovement on itspredecessors, taking upissues of lower fares, loweremissions, and investment,and extending an invitation tosocial enterprise bidders.

Priced outHowever, with regards to

this latter, equality ofopportunity must be matchedwith equality of support totake up this opportunity; inshort, given that it costsabout £10-12million just tomake a bid, pretty much allsocial enterprises are pricedout the market from theoutset. How about a wee grant for

social enterprises, to enablethem to make a viable bid? He further urges that the ITT

should propose a ten yearcontract for the successfulbidder, and a 15 year one forthe Sleeper service, toencourage long-terminvestment, and create stability. A people’s railway is not as

out-of-reach as it may seem,and with independence, wewould shake off the legacy ofthe Railways Act 1993, whichinflicted privatisation on ourrail network whether we likedit or not (we didn’t). With a will, and a vision

such as Paul’s, of cooperativevalues and progressiveplanning, we could at last beon the right tracks.

• See: paulsalveson.org.uk

ON THE RIGHT TRACK: with independence, we could reverse the spectre of rail privatisation

NORTHERN ENGLANDby Paul Salveson,General Secretary of theHannah MitchellFoundation

SCOTLAND IS changing –and it will drag the rest of the UKalong with it, one way or another.Whatever the outcome of thisyear’s referendum on independ-ence, Britain will have changed,and changed quite utterly. As a northern Englishmanwho spends some time in Scot-land, it’s impossible not to beamazed by the political fermentnorth of the border. Scotland isbuzzing with ideas and radicalthinking, and most of that – well,all of it to be honest – is comingfrom the Yes campaigners. In contrast, the ‘Better To-gether’ parties seem to be relyingon fear rather than any positiveargument for Scotland remain-ing part of a reformed UnitedKingdom. It’s just more of thesame, with the promise that ifScots vote No they will get fur-ther devolved powers. Scotland will make its mindup this September. But what ofthe left in England, and for thatmatter Wales: should we wel-come an independent Scotlandor see it as a slightly discourte-ous goodbye, consigning us todecades of Tory rule?

Devolved powersThere’s no doubt that Scotlandleaving the UK would result in ahuge boost to the Tories, givingthem an almost certain in-builtmajority based on currentarrangements. Wales has a de-gree of protection through itsown (Labour-administered)Welsh Government and furtherpowers are likely to be devolved. The huge democratic deficitwill be in the English regions,particularly the North and Mid-lands which have remainedstaunchly anti-Tory. An independent Scotlandcould, you may argue, mean thatthe Tory-voting South will con-sign the Labour-inclined Northand Midlands to permanent po-

litical exclusion. That’s the con-ventional ‘Labourist’ viewwhich sees politics as beingabout seats and voting patterns. We shouldn’t dismiss itlightly, but there is a broaderissue for the radical democraticleft. Scottish independence willsend shock waves through theBritish political system resultingin consequences which we canonly speculate upon. It would potentially open theway for an independent Wales – anation which, if anything, is evenmore anti-Tory than Scotland. Itwould certainly strengthen the po-sition of Plaid Cymru, whose pol-itics are closer to those ofChartist’s than we may think. A re-constituted Labour/Plaidcoalition government whichedges towards independencebased on radical left of centrepolitics would further isolateEngland. And England is the bigissue. It is not comparable in sizeor power to either Scotland orWales. It has a population ofover 53 million, compared toScotland’s 5.3 million andWales’ 3.1 million. Its economic and politicalpower, increasingly concentratedin the south-east, is enormous. It’slaughable when the pro-Englishparliament lobby complainsabout ‘poor little England’ beingbossed around by the horrid Scotsand Welsh. We’ve been bossingthem around – and much of the

rest of the world – for centuries. Perhaps we are seeing the be-ginning of the end of JohnBull’s Great Britain. This issomething that radical social-ists, be they English, Welsh orScots, should welcome. A Yes vote for Scottish inde-pendence will force the pace ofchange south of the border. Thecurrent centralised governance,with power concentrated on Lon-don and the South-East, wouldnot continue indefinitely. Changewould come, not perhaps in ayear or two but maybe over adecade. And that change, poten-tially, could lead to a democratic,federal British Isles in which notonly England, Wales and North-ern Ireland form part, but possi-bly Scotland and – who knows?- the Irish Republic. And Londonwould no longer rule the roost. Fundamental change mustcome to England, based on di-rectly-elected regional assemblesand a reformed and re-energisedlocal government. The two areclosely related and the last threedecades have seen the withering oflocal democracy across the UK. It is now entering what many

local government professionalssee as terminal decline, with aperfect storm of governmentcuts, much fewer powers andvoter turn-out to alarming levelsof indifference. If the left is seri-ous about developing a new, in-clusive politics we have todevelop a vision of a vibrantlocal and regional democracywhich is open and dynamic. The jury is very much open asto whether Labour will be ableto position itself at the head ofthat movement, together withprogressive Liberal Democrats,Greens, non-aligned radicals andpartners in Scotland and Wales. Based on its performance inScotland so far, with its tribalismand reliance on a politics of fear,it doesn’t look very likely. Aneven bigger problem is theLabour front-bench obsessionwith winning the ‘southern’ vote. That’s no bad thing in itself,but if it is based on neglecting itsNorthern base with a watered-down Blairism and a ‘supermar-ket politics’ that does little morethan offer you savings on yournext energy bill, it will fail.

Powerful beastEnglish regionalism was de-scribed by the SNP’s ChrisHarvie as the dog that neverbarked. We could well be seeingthe stirring of what is still verymuch a pup, but one that maygrow into a powerful beast. Scottish and Welsh devolutionwas driven as much by the threatof the SNP and Plaid Cymrubreathing down Labour’s neckas any sincere desire for decen-tralisation by Blair. As yet, there is no threat fromradical centre-left regional par-ties in England: but it mightcome to that. In the meantime,I’m hoping Scotland votes Yes.

WHATABOUT‘UPNORTH’?

• This is a slightly revised version of an article published inChartist December/January issue and is reproduced withpermission of the editor. Paul’s website is at:www.paulsalveson.org.uk The Hannah Mitchell Foundation isa non-sectarian campaign for North of England devolution,named in honour of an outstanding working class socialist,feminist and co-operator. See: hannahmitchell.org.uk


COLIN FOX


by Colin Fox

THE 1.2 per cent growth inthe UK economy heralded byTory Chancellor GeorgeOsborne in his ‘AutumnStatement’ is unlikely toprovide much relief forworking people any time soon.That was the stark messagefrom the Office for BudgetResponsibility at New Year.

Their report on the state ofthe UK economy pointed out,among other things, that thepurchasing power of averagewages has fallen by 17 percent in real terms since 2008and shows no signs ofrecovery before 2017.

The average Scots familytherefore faces a loss of £61a week in median earningscompared to 2008 by 2018.

That dreary prospect oughtto focus the minds of workingclass families across Scotlandin the run up to September’sindependence referendum.Having spent the last fiveyears stretching householdbudgets to cover soaring foodprices, gas and electricity billsand transport costs theyincreasingly find they cannotmake ends meet withoutresorting to further borrowing.

Indebted familiesEven those not yet relying

on Wonga, Cash Converters,or Provident Cheques faceincreased pressure onrepayments as wagestumble. Any rise in interestrates for millions of alreadyindebted families could provedisastrous. And yet mosteconomists forecast just sucha rise sometime this year.

The OBR report alsorevealed the number of peoplein work and in poverty is nowgreater than the total of theunemployed and retiredcombined. And to add insult toinjury the National Audit Office(NAO) warned households toexpect above inflationincreases in gas and electricity

bills for the next 17 years asenergy companies recoup thecost of infrastructureinvestments from hard pressedcustomers. This at a timewhen one in three householdsin Scotland already suffer themisery of fuel poverty!

For the vast majority ofScots then their economicdistress is not over, not by along way. And with GeorgeOsborne also signalling afurther £25billion in publicspending cuts should theTories be re-elected in 2015falling living standards arelikely to provide the decisivebackdrop to this year’sScottish independencereferendum. Nicola Sturgeonand Alistair Darling areagreed on that much at least.

The ongoing debate withinthe Yes camp over whetherpeople are more likely to votefor independence if theeconomy is growing rather thandeclining is more nuanced than

any straight correlation mightsuggest because official figuresindicate an upturn in the UKeconomy whereas the vastmajority of people continue toexperience a fall in their livingstandards. The SNP have longtaken the view that aneconomic upturn is aprerequisite for a Yes vote.Others believe poorereconomic conditions make iteasier for many people toreject the status quo and themiserable prospects itforeshadows.

Alongside such economicfactors determining theoutcome of the referendumstands the prospect of anotherTory government beingelected at Westminster in2015. And it is clear Cameronand Osborne will lay claims tohave successfully steered theUK economy out of ‘Laboursdisastrous recession’. So wecan expect that message tobe played over and over by

Tory spin-doctors throughoutthe year ahead. All theevidence clearly shows thatsupport for independence willgrow if another Torygovernment seems likely. Thesame progress can beexpected if, as seems likely,UKIP emerges with the largestoverall share of the Europeanelections vote in England.

With support for Yesstrongest amongst theworking class and thepoorest the Scottish SocialistParty clearly has a crucialrole to play in convincingmore of them they will beeconomically, socially andpolitically better off withindependence. Ruling outanother Tory government is apowerful reason why workingclass people should vote Yes.

So the key question is howdo we convince and mobilisethose as yet undecidedworking class Scots to voteYes? Promising better jobswith improved pay andconditions, trade unionmembership, greaterprotection and publicownership of services like theRoyal Mail is clearly one partof the answer for sure.

Getting involvedThe other part needs to

make clear that working peoplelike us get nothing withoutstruggling for it. We need topersuade them therefore notonly to vote Yes but also to getinvolved in the independencecampaign itself to help shapethe kind of independentScotland that emerges fromthat positive result.

Together with the RadicalIndependence Campaign andthe Yes side, the SSP mustfully appreciate that of themany tasks confronting us inthe next eight monthsuppermost is inspiring,energising and mobilising theScottish working class behindour banner. That is the key toour victory in September.

Winning workersto Yes is key toindy victory

PHOTO: Craig Maclean

WORKPLACE


by Richie Venton, SSP national workplaceorganiser

WORKING CLASS people,the majority population of Scotland,face a stark choice this September.Vote NO to democratic self-govern-ment and get a renewed dose of at-tacks on jobs, wages, rights at work,benefits and public services from aWestminster regime emboldenedby their success in seeing off anythreatened ‘Scots rebellion’. Or vote Yes this year so that in

2016 and beyond we get the gov-ernments chosen by the workingclass majority, under a ProportionalRepresentation system more in tunewith voters’ wishes, boosting theprospects of a government of theleft, hastening the day when a radi-cal socialist transformation of soci-ety banishes low pay, poverty,inequality and exploitation. But nothing will be handed to us

on a silver plate by the billionaires,bankers and business tycoons whocurrently rule the roost. Working class people, trade

unionists included, need to organiseto shape Scotland’s future... not justfighting for a Yes majority, but si-multaneously forging the policiesand measures that would decisivelychange the lives of the millionsthereafter.

No vote/Tory voteThe evidence is mounting that a

No vote is a vote for Tory dictator-ship over Scotland – a message thattrade unionists and workers cling-ing onto their Labour loyaltieswould be wise to heed. The anti-independence Better

Together is blatantly Tory-fundedwhilst Labour-fronted. They must have thought Christ-

mas was a good time to bury badnews, but no Labour voter can af-ford to ignore the announcementof £1.3million in donations toBetter Together by 19 obnox-iously wealthy individuals whoare also longstanding donors tothe Tory party. People like Andrew Fraser, City

of London stockbroker, formerhead of Barings Bank (before it

collapsed), and previously giver of£1million to the Tory party. Hegave BT £200,000 to hold ontoScotland’s wealth for his parasiticclass. Hotel and whiskey tycoonDonald Houston gave them£600,000. London-based DeutscheBank executive Ivor Dunbar do-nated £50,000. Another £20,000was handed over by two leadingfigures from Hakluyt, the ‘privateintelligence’ company with links tostate spy-network MI6. So bankers, capitalist chief exec-

utives and spies – none of them res-ident in Scotland –want to fund theFear Factory that is Better Together,in a ruthless bid to terrorise theScottish working class into leavingthe rich elite’s political puppets atWestminster in charge, to sustainthe profiteering and exploitation ofworkers and natural wealth theycurrently enjoy. He who pays thepiper calls the tune.As veteran leading Labour fig-

ure, former Glasgow Provost andtrade unionist Alex Mosson astutelysaid, “This roll-call of No campaigndonors should come as no surpriseto anybody who understands thevested interests at play. “This should act as a wake-up

call to everybody, especially thosein the Labour Party, if they’re kid-ding themselves that the No cam-paign is anything other than aTory-led propaganda machine.” The other Yuletide pronounce-

ments that should put the fear ofgod into any worker bamboozledinto thinking of voting No wasthat of Tory Chancellor GeorgeOsborne. His declaration of class war in-

cluded a further £25billion cuts,over half of them to welfare bene-fits, with plans to abolish housing

benefits to the under-25s, slashScotland’s funding from Westmin-ster through ‘changes’ to (or aboli-tion of) the Barnett Formula, andtarget pensioners for cuts – a movepreviously seen as taboo, for fear ofalienating the ‘grey’ vote. That’s the future if working

class Scots fall for the No camp’sscaremongering. If you’ll forgivethe ‘musical’ pun, it’s not even theStatus Quo, but One Direction –backwards!

Labour panicSome Labour Party and trade

union officials who have done theirmembers and supporters the unfor-givable disservice of jumping intobed with the sworn Tory enemies ofthe working class are beginning topanic that traditional Labour votershave spotted their treachery. They panic at polls showing one

in five Labour voters already planto vote Yes, and the growth ofLabour for Independence, with sev-eral Labour veterans recently sup-porting independence. Some union officials, like the

GMB’s Richard Leonard, are des-perately seeking to distance them-selves from the Tory-funded BetterTogether, because their own mem-bers are up in arms about Labourand many union leaders joiningforces with the party of the bed-room tax and naked class war. Gordon Brown has been

wheeled out to breathe life intoUnited for Labour, which in realityis the Labour wing of Tory-fundedBetter Together, but talks hypocrit-ical platitudes about being ‘unitedfor social justice’ in the UK. Where was Gordon Brown, or

BT’s Labour poster boy AlistairDarling, when the last Labour gov-

ernment presided over escalatinginequality, savage job and servicecuts to fund the bankers’ bailout,and continued use of hate-figureThatcher’s anti-trade union laws tocow workers into submission? Labour has had decades to prove

their claims that workers are ‘bettertogether’ under Westminster rule,but the real-life results includedrampant privatisation and profiteer-ing (under New Labour), the mostruthless workplace repression inwestern Europe (by Blair’s own ad-mission/boast), the squandering of£1.3trillion of taxpayers’ money toprop up the bankers and theirbonuses, the worst levels of re-gional inequality (between theSouth East of England and the rest)of any EU country, and amongst thelowest wages, longest workingweek and poorest pensions in thewhole of Europe. That’s Blair, Brown and Dar-

ling’s heritage, and the future theyoffer workers in a Labour-run cap-italist UK. Sustained Tory or Tory-UKIP

rule is an indescribable nightmarefor the working class. But even thefar-from-guaranteed prospect of aWestminster Labour governmentshould fill workers with dread. British Labour are beyond re-

demption, beyond the reach of tradeunions or socialists trying to reclaimthe party founded a century ago torepresent the working class. Theparty that generations of workersput their faith in no longer exists. And Scottish self-government is

the only realistic route to revivingthe founding principles of thelabour movement pioneers, pro-vided working class people get or-ganised now to demand changeafter winning self-rule. That’s

WORKERS FACESTARK CHOICES

WORKPLACE


where fighting for a Yes vote andfor the longer term combine. To win a majority of the work-

ing class for Yes requires a bold,dynamic vision of a new Scotland,one where the fabulous wealth ofresources and skills are deployedto boost the living standards ofmillions. This is a struggle for the hearts

and minds of working class peo-ple, and the Yes campaign needsto tap into the deep seated tradi-tions of hatred for unfairness, in-justice and inequality in the soulof Scottish workers. That’s where the fighting de-

mands for change put forward bynot only the SSP but also broad-based campaigns like Trade Union-ists for Independence (TUFI)become critical. The Scottish SNP government’s

White Paper has put the No campon the run by exposing their com-plete lack of a clear vision of whatwould follow a NO vote. In con-trast to their reliance on lies andscaremongering, the White Paperpledges numerous welcome re-forms, such as childcare provisionfor all 3-4 year olds on a par withprimary school hours; protectionof pensions; defence of fee-free

university education; a 5 per centcut to energy bills; encouragementand involvement of trade unions;rises in the minimum wage tomatch inflation; restoration of 90-day consultation on redundancies;renationalisation of Royal Mail;removal of Trident weapons...toname a few. But to win a Yes ma-jority in the population that countsmost – the working class – YesScotland should boldly go beyondthese welcome promises. And the SSP, TUFI (which in-

cludes Labour for Independencetrade unionists) and individualunion branches have a critical roleto play in popularising measuresthat could and should be carried outafter a Yes vote.

Limited agendaNobody expects a Coalition like

Yes Scotland to embrace the entiresocialist aims of the SSP, but theyurgently need to go beyond the lim-ited agenda put by their SNP com-ponent if they are to win the battlefor the working class vote. Rather than merely promising

to inflation-proof the current pa-thetic £6.31 minimum wage (withfar lower youth rates) Yes Scot-land should spell out a vision of a

guaranteed living wage as theminimum for all at 16, without agediscrimination. In addition to public ownership

of Royal Mail, they should high-light the opportunity for publicownership – at the very least – ofour railways and energy companiesto combat nauseating profiteeringand the crime of fuel poverty. And to expose the nightmare fac-

ing people at work if Westminster’sdictatorship of the rich is allowed tocontinue, Yes Scotland should as abare minimum adopt a charter ofworkers’ rights. These should includes the right

to join and organise unions withoutfear of victimisation or blacklisting;legal guarantees for elected unionrepresentatives to function duringworks time to represent members;an end to state interference in therunning of union affairs and internalelections; abolition of fees for Em-ployment Tribunals; a constitutionalright to strike and removal of theban on solidarity action. By putting forward measures to

lift the climate of fear in work-places, allowing unions to functionindependently of employers and thegovernment, Yes Scotland couldgive 630,000 trade union members

and countless other non-members aglimpse of a new Scotland wherethey would be profoundly better off. Whilst calling on the umbrella

Yes Scotland to travel this route,trade unionists should and willchampion such policies as part oforganising to shape Scotland’s fu-ture in the interests of its workingclass majority. That is why all of us should cel-

ebrate the overwhelming decisionby the Scottish conference of theLeft Unity formation in the biggestcivil and public service union, PCS,to campaign for independence –which SSP members in the unionplayed a major part in achieving. That is why Trade Unionists for

Independence, embracing workersfrom several parties and none, hasa major part to play and is steppingup its efforts to reach workplaces. That is why the SSP – which is

uniquely placed as the only party tohave for fought for an independentsocialist Scotland for the past 15years – is determined to pick up thebanner trampled in the muck by theTory-collaborating Labour leaders.

Tax the richOur vision of an independent

Scotland goes miles beyond thetimid reforms advocated by theSNP leadership, as we championtaxation of big business and therich; democratic public ownershipof the major industries, services andbanking; a socialist democracywhere working class people gainthe full fruits of their labour insteadof being stripped of living standardsand rights so the bankers and bil-lionaires can amass obscene profits. Working people, traditionally

many of them Labour voters, face astark choice. Socialists have a dutyto help clarify that choice, showhow a Yes vote can kick open thedoor to radical socialist change,whereas a No vote would condemnthem to the jailhouse conditionssuffered by millions in a capitalistBritain where different factions ofTory ideology are all that’s on offer. The Scottish Socialist Party is

determined to help workers reachthat conclusion and to organise toshape Scotland’s future.

HOPELESS: Ed Miliband and Johann Lamont – the ‘cream’ of an unelectable Labour Party

WAR ‘CELEBRATIONS’


by Isobel Lindsay, chair of the Alternative1914 CommemorationCommittee

ON NEW Year’s Day some-one passed me a picture of thenew two-pound coin and mycomment was that it was a Na-tional Collective stunt. The hideous recruiting poster

designed to pressurise youngmen to sign away their liveswas such a much-derided sym-bol that it was hard to believethat the representatives of theBritish state could select this asopposed to many other moredignified images. But as David Cameron and

Michael Gove have shown, neverunderestimate the crude jingoismof Great Britain. Cameron’s slipin talking about “celebrating thestart of World War One like theJubilee” was an indication oftheir political strategy. They mayhave miscalculated. We set up the Alternative

WW1 Commemoration Com-mittee to help tell the real storyto people in Scotland today, notmany of whom will still havefamily memories.

Profound impactProportionately, Scotland suf-

fered greater losses than anyother countries except Serbiaand Turkey. Over 26 per cent ofthe Scots who went to war diedand this was around 11 per centof males of fighting age. Theequivalent figure for Britain asa whole and Ireland was over 11per cent of those mobiliseddying which was 6 per cent ofthe fighting age males. This isnot to suggest some competi-tion about our pain beinggreater than your pain but to il-lustrate the particularly pro-found impact of the war here. This was a war of competing

imperialist powers. The domi-nant imperial powers of Britainand France wanted to keep theirposition while Germany wantedto grow its own empire. TsaristRussia, France and Britain were

in an alliance to contain Ger-many and Germany was eyingup possible spoils in Africa. Vir-ulent supporters of empire likeCecil Rhodes and the pressbaron, Lord Northcliffe,whipped up anti-German hyste-ria for years before the war. Northcliffe, owner of the Daily

Mail and many other papers, wasput in charge of Governmentpropaganda when the warstarted. Nothing much changes. One of our main tasks will be

to introduce the present genera-tion to the outstanding figures inScottish political history who ledthe opposition to the war. Theirsacrifice, their passion and theircampaigning skills make manyof today’s political activists lookanaemic in comparison. Some of the men are still fairly

well-known but the role of thewomen is less so. Keir Hardiewas heart-broken when, despitehis best efforts, the majority inthe Labour Party backed the war.The Independent Labour Party,however, took a very differentstance, especially in Scotland,and played the leading role in the

anti-war campaign. For anyonewith a Scottish Labour move-ment background, such namesas John Wheatley, Jimmy Max-ton, John Maclean, David Kirk-wood, Patrick Dollan are in thepolitical DNA. They showed outstanding

courage in facing down the pro-war jingoism. But their role wasequalled by the women cam-paigners. Crystal Macmillanwas one of the leading organis-ers of the Women’s InternationalLeague which in 1915 broughttogether over a thousand womendelegates from all over Europeand the US to promote a negoti-ated settlement to the war. Macmillan was one of the rep-

resentatives sent to meet heads ofvarious European countries andthe USA to try to get them to takethe initiative in starting negotia-tions. The ‘Great Glasgow Three’– Mary Barbour, Helen Craw-furd and Agnes Dollan – organ-ised demonstrations at the start ofthe war, the rent strikes during itand started the Women’s PeaceCrusade which had 100 branchesby the end of the war.

The ILP’s anti-war stanceshould have damaged it but bythe end of the war its member-ship in Scotland had trebled andits branches doubled. This didnot happen in England. An Eng-lish ILP leader suggested thatanti-war feeling was more ener-getic and aggressive in Scot-land. In the election in 1922,ILP candidates won ten out ofthe 15 seats in Glasgow. The establishment story will

be about great patriotic sacrifice.Our story is about wasted livesand terrible outcomes. It wascertainly not the ‘war to endwars’. On the contrary it wasWW1 and the Treaty at its endwhich created the conditions forthe rise of Hitler and WW2.

Middle EastThe very punitive sanctions

imposed on Germany and itscomplete humiliation left a bro-ken economy and extensivestarvation. But the British Em-pire did well out of the war. With the collapse of the Ot-

toman Empire, Britain andFrance carved up the Middle-East for themselves with no ref-erences to the people livingthere. Many of the current prob-lems in that region go right backto these colonial powers draw-ing artificial lines on a map withno cultural concerns. We had a successful ‘Danger-

ous Women’ conference in No-vember to promote the work ofthe anti-war women. We are try-ing to get Glasgow City Councilto place a plaque to commemo-rate those who opposed the war. We are having an event on 21

March on the anti-war poets andnovelists. We will be planningother activities and we wantpeople in their various organisa-tions to take every opportunityto tell the real story of the war.

ALTERNATIVE VIEW OUTLINEDAS WW1 JINGOISM GROWS

PROFOUND IMPACT: over a quarter of Scots who went to war died

CAMPAIGNING


by Calum Martin,Edinburgh University SSP

UNIVERSITIES have longproven their ability to functionas hotbeds of politicalactivities, and Scotland’suniversities are no exceptionto this. As the referendumcampaigns continue to heatup, Yes campaigning atEdinburgh University hasstepped up a notch this year,the highlight of this being aYes meeting held on Tuesday3 December, a meeting theSSP were instrumental inorganising. This year marks a

substantial boost to SSPactivities at EdinburghUniversity with theestablishment in August of theEdinburgh University SSPSociety (EUSSPS), and it wasin conjunction withcounterparts from theEdinburgh University SNPsociety (or EdinburghUniversity Scottish NationalistAssociation, EUSNA) that thismeeting was organised.

Real successThis was the first Yes

meeting held on the Edinburghcampus, and it proved to be areal success. The totalaudience reached nearly 40people – substantially morethan the 30 seats organisershad initially provided – fairlyevenly split between Yes andundecided voters. This ratiowould change before the endof the meeting.With SSP Edinburgh

University branch secretaryCalum Martin co-chairing themeeting, representing theSSP on the panel was PaoloCaserta who strongly putforward the case for anindependent SocialistScotland, focused on ‘Why

working people will be betteroff with independence’,economically, socially andpolitically with a Yes vote nextyear. The warmth of the response

by the student audience tothis progressive case wasclear from the outset, whenPaolo’s opening point, thatsupporting the right of nationsto self-determination does notmake you a nationalist, itmakes you a democrat, wasinstantly met with solidapplause from the floor. From this point he continued,

elaborating on why Scots willbe better off with independenceby pointing out “that ourstandards of living have beendramatically declining in thelast few years thanks tomeasures implemented by theWestminster government, suchas the infamous Bedroom Tax,designed to make workingclass people pay for a crisisthat was caused by therecklessness of greedybankers and the ineptitude ofcorrupt politicians and that asthe Prime Minister was callingfor “permanent austerity” all thesigns pointed to a furtherdecline in our living conditions”;and proceeded that “we needthe powers to properly addressthe inequities that blight our

nation, like the fact thatthousands of families are nowbeing forced to rely on foodbanks because they cannotlonger afford to feedthemselves, and these powerswill only come withindependence”. Further presenting the SSP

case “to build an independentsocialist Scotland that is notonly at peace with itself butalso with its neighbours andthe rest of the world”, freefrom both WMDs and illegalwars, the audience grew onlymore supportive.

Fuel povertyIndeed as Paolo concluded,

stating that without ourresources being “siphoned offto the Treasury in London wecould eradicate the indignity offuel poverty that sees one inthree household in Scotlandhaving to choose betweeneating or heating”, and thatfurther, “we can create newjobs, ending exploitation ofworking people by scrupulousemployers and graduallyreaching full employment; wecan improve ourinfrastructure, health care,social care and education,” itwas clear how well receivedthe SSP case forindependence was.

By the end of the meeting,another poll reveal just howmuch the numbers hadchanged when presented withthe case for Independence.The number of undecidedvoters had halved, theaudience having swung infavour of independence. To see such numbers of

students turning out at theheight of exam season to hearthe case for independence isundoubtedly a good sign forthe supporters of a Yes vote,and to see the change inattitude amongst the audienceis testament to the strength ofthe case for independence. The progress so far of the

Edinburgh University SSPSociety is substantial, and canbe counted to include theestablishment of weekly streetstalls, leading to healthy signsof growth and increasinglyregular and well attendedsociety meetings. Thanks to the strength of

the SSP here, by workingalongside the SNP and otherYes campaigners, EdinburghUniversity has now becomehome to a very potent Yesgroup. A group EUSSPS shallbe at the forefront of, carryingforth our message of anindependent socialistScotland.

Campaigning at Edinburgh UniA POSITIVE SIGN:

Edinburgh Universityhas now becomehome to a very

potent Yes group

HIDDEN HISTORIES

by Campbell Martin

THE FIRST LabourGovernment, led byScotsman RamsayMacDonald, went down to aheavy defeat in the GeneralElection of October 1924,having served little more thanten months in office. Labour’s failure to

represent the interests of theworking class – claiming tobe a national governmentrather than a classgovernment – had been amassive disappointment tomillions of workers the lengthand breadth of the countrywho were then faced with thereturn of a Tory Government,and one with its largestparliamentary majority in 50years.

Bosses cutsThe government, led by

Stanley Baldwin, took thedecision to return Britain tothe Gold Standard, an indexby which the value of thepound could be measured. This, combined with the

return of mines to privateownership, resulted in the so-called leaders of industry, thebosses, demanding cuts toworkers’ wages and longerhours, in order, they claimed,to make their businesses andthe national economy ‘morecompetitive’. Miners were faced with

reductions to wages thatwould have taken pay-rates

to below 1914 levels, beforethe outbreak of the FirstWorld War. When minersunderstandably refused toaccept this, owners lockedthem out of the pits. At this point, the Tory

Government stepped-in,setting up a Commissionunder Sir Herbert Samuel,which was tasked withexamining pay-rates andworking-hours in the miningindustry. In reality, however, the

Commission’s main purposewas to buy breathing spacefor the government and mine-owners to prepare for aninevitable strike. To little surprise, the

Samuel Commission report ofMarch 1926 includedrecommendations to slashminers’ wages by up to 13

per cent and increase theworking day. Workers were united and

determined to resist what wasclearly a co-ordinated attack,not just on the miners but onthe working class. However, trades union

leaders and the Labour Partytook the position that pay-cuts were a fair exchange forbosses’ promises ofreorganisation and continuedemployment in the future – aTrades Union Congress(TUC) official was infamouslyquoted at the time, describingthe miners’ position of “not apenny off the pay, not asecond on the day” as a“mere slogan” that would “getthem nowhere”. The TUC General Council

and Special IndustrialCommittee spent six weeks indesperate negotiations withbosses and Tory Governmentofficials trying to avert astrike. On 30 April 1926, mine-

owners laid down their finaldemands, which for miners inScotland would have meant awage cut from 9/4d a day to

7/6d plus an extra hour on adaily shift. A special miners’conference rejected the newterms. The following day, May 1st,

a state of emergency wasdeclared by the governmentin preparation for a generalstrike, with the introduction ofan Organisation ofMaintenance and Supplies(OMS) tasked with breakingthe strike and keepingsupplies moving.

TroopsThe Tory Government had

used the nine-month durationof the Samuel Commission toput in place its strike-breaking plan, including themovement of troops to areasexpected to be affected. All of this was in place

before the General Council ofthe TUC finally voted to backa general strike, with effectfrom midnight on Monday, 3May 1926. The solidarity between

strikers and the generalpublic was resolute: inGlasgow, strike-breakers ofthe OMS, many of them

1926 GeneralStrike showedboth braveryand betrayal

The actions of union leaders were deemed to

be an unconditional surrender,a betrayal of the workers whotook strike action and of thepublic who supported them...


HIDDEN HISTORIES


students, were frequentlyattacked. On 6 May a miners’picket marched on a tramdepot in Ruby Street in anattempt to prevent ‘scab’labour from operating thetransport system. However, the miners found

the premises occupied bypolice who attacked withbatons drawn, resulting inwhat was described at thetime as ‘a fierce battle’. Strikers and supporters

who were arrested foundthemselves sentenced toharsh, relatively long terms inprison. Meanwhile, the Tory

Government in London sentseven naval ships to theClyde, with sailors used asadditional labour for the OMS. In addition to the miners,

workers from the railwaysand other areas of transporttook part in the first wave ofstrike action, along with thosefrom the building industry,steel plants and printing. Incredibly, though,

shipbuilding and engineeringworkers – the backbone ofworking class Clydeside –were designated by tradesunion leaders in London asthe ‘second line’.

Just four days into thestrike – at a time when thedetermination andcommitment of strikers wasgrowing even stronger – thenegotiating committee of theTrades Union Congress inLondon met with Sir HerbertSamuel.

BetrayalThe meeting took place

without the knowledge ofstrikers and just asshipbuilding and engineeringworkers downed tools. Samuel proposed what

was effectively a rehash of

his Commission’s earlierproposals and, incredibly, theTUC accepted what wasoffered. Against the wishes of the

miners, the General Councilof the TUC called-off thestrike and, on 12 May, theyinformed Tory Prime MinisterStanley Baldwin that thestrike was over. At the time, and to this day,

the actions of union leaderswere deemed to be anunconditional surrender, abetrayal of the workers whotook strike action and of thepublic who supported them.

Join the SSP hereFill in this form and send it to: Scottish Socialist Party, Suite 370, 4th Floor, Central Chambers, 93 Hope St, Glasgow G2 6LD.Or telephone: 0781 126 5388Or see our website: www.scottishsocialistparty.orgg I would like to join the Scottish Socialist Partyg I would also like to join Scottish Socialist Youthg I would like more info on the Scottish Socialist PartyName........................................................................................Address...........................................................................................................................................................................................Phone.........................................................................................Email...........................................................................................

PROPER SOLIDARITY: but union leaders would betray the workers who took strike action and the public who supported them

WELFARE


by Sandra Webster

THE PAST week has onceagain demonstrated what iswrong with our current parlia-mentary system. Introducingfree school meals to all primaryone to three children should besomething that is welcomed onboth sides of the political divide.

Johann Lamont’s ScottishLabour Party and their obses-sion to end universal benefitsstaggered once again into theheadlights when they said theywould vote against the policyannounced by Alex Salmond.

Even press sympathetic to theLabour Party were quick to con-demn their actions. It is yet an-other exercise in self-flagellationby a Scottish Labour Party whoseem more and more out oftouch with their traditional voters.

End freebie stigmaLamont has consistently

spoken about “the need to tar-get help where it is mostneeded” and thus has decidedLabour will vote against theSNP policy. Universality wouldmean an end to stigma and itwould be cheaper and simplerto administer. We are usedsuch tactics. The SSP have al-ways been at the forefront of acampaign for universal schoolmeals for all school childrenalongside charities such as theChild Poverty Action Group.

The Scottish Government inits White Paper laid out plansfor childcare they claim can betransformative free schoolsmeals for all of our childrencould have even more benefi-

cial effects. The present schoolmeals are mostly heated upfrom processed foods in a cen-tral kitchen. It this then chillblasted sent out to variousschools and then reheated. Notvery appetising at the beginningand even worse when they aredished up on the lunch plate.

Managers not chefs andcooks number crunch thecosts with nutritional valuecoming further down the scale.

This is a subject though thatseems to have caught theimagination of many people insocial media who have calledfor a return to cooking and bak-ing happening at an individualschool, where children canlearn where food comes from.

A health diet can also lead tohealth benefits and encourageall children from all backgroundsto have a healthy hot meal at

least once a day. For some chil-dren this may be the only ac-cess they have to a hot meal.

Austerity is not only impact-ing on the children of peopleon benefits both in and out ofwork, but even families whoare seen to be more well off.

Universality would mean ahot meal for everyone noquestions asked. So whywould the Labour Party decideto vote against it?

The Christmas period is be-hind us but in the film Miracleon 34th Street, shops learnedthat by advertising their rivals’wares, consumer confidencegrew in their own shops.

If only this could be a lessonlearned in Scottish and UKpolitics. A little fairy dust ofcommon sense. Where politi-cians of every persuasioncould get behind good ideas

and if even not feel able tovote in favour of them at leastabstain in a vote against.

However with the referen-dum looming and Labour’s in-tent to maintain the status quo,similar behaviour is going tobe expected. It seems as theSNP try to present themselvesas moving further to the left,New Labour are being forcedinto the vacuum of more rightwing territory left behind.

Winning hearts and mindswill equate into votes for Yes inthe independence referen-dum. We hope that voters willwant a change and won’t votefor a party who voted againstsuch a sensible promise of afree lunch for more children.

Votes Labour’s lostThe only losers will be the

Labour Party and their credibilitywith their traditional voters. Thedoor is now open for groupssuch as Labour For Independ-ence to give their perspective.

This move is the first step inthe right direction and is evi-dence of how the work of SSPMSPs who originally cam-paigned for universal freeschool meals has impacted ontoday’s Scottish Parliament.We need a different systemand the end of the two partysystem that Holyrood was de-signed to prevent.

SSP free school meals policyimpacts Holyrood in 2014

PH

OTO

: Jo Harvie

THE CUBA Solidarity Campaign has an-nounced the latest details of the InternationalCommission of Inquiry into the case of theCuban Five as well as several associated eventsto be held in London on 7 and 8 March. RenéGonzález, the first and only member of theCuban (Miami) Five to have been released aftercompleting his 15 year sentence in the UnitedStates, has announced that he will come to Lon-don to give evidence. He will be joined by fam-

ily members of the Five, victims of terrorismagainst Cuba, lawyers, politicians and cam-paigners from Cuba and across the world, in-cluding Alice Walker, Pulitzer Prize winningauthor of the Color Purple and former US At-torney General Ramsey Clark. The Commissionwill hear testimony from around 20 key wit-nesses including US defence attorney MartinGarbus, representatives from internationalhuman rights organisation Amnesty Interna-

tional, and from Miami Five family membersincluding wives of the Five, Olga Salanueva andElizabeth Palmeiro. There will be testimonyfrom specialists on the range of measures takento defend Cuba against the threat of terrorist at-tacks, as well as testimony from Cuban and in-ternational victims of US based terrorism.

• To find out more and book tickets go to:voicesforthefive.com/commission

CAMPAIGN ANNOUNCES CUBAN FIVE COMMISSION DETAILS

INTERNATIONAL


by Bill Bonnar

THE CURRENT conflict inSouth Sudan shows that theprocess of nation building can bedifficult and complex. Faced byregular incursions from the Northit is currently engulfed in a tribalconflict which threatens the veryintegrity of the new state. South Sudan became an inde-pendent state two years ago aftera long liberation war against theNorth. A vast country it has littlein the way of infrastructure oreconomic development and hashad to cope with the legacy of ageneration of war including hun-dreds of thousands of deaths,around two million internalrefugees and a government in theNorth which actively promotedethnic division as part of a divideand rule strategy.

Diverse regionsThe country is made up ofthree diverse regions; Dhar ElGhazal, Equitoria and GreaterUpper Nile which often have al-legiance to specific tribal groups;the largest of which are theDinka and Noer. The Dinka arethe most numerous and homog-enous of the tribes. United by re-ligion (Christian) and officiallanguage (English); they formedthe backbone of the liberationstruggle and were the core of theSudan People’s Liberation Army. The Noer are the largest of arange of other tribal groups whofear that South Sudan is begin-ning to resemble a Dinka state.Tensions came to a head whenthe Vice President, Reik Machar,from the Noer tribe, was accusedof trying to stage a coup againstthe current President KittMatardit. This triggered a major

outbreak of violence with troopsloyal to both sides involved. The sides are heavily armedwith modern weaponry and theconflict, if not contained couldspread to neighbouring states. Atthe time of writing peace talks aretaking place in Ethiopia althoughevents on the ground are movingmuch faster than the talks. Manyparts of the country are dividingalong tribal lines with thousandskilled and around 250,000 peopledisplaced. In part the fighting isaimed at creating advantage onthe ground ahead of peace talksalthough in a country lacking inany kind of infrastructure this im-plies a degree of co-ordinationand control which rarely exists. Much of what is now happeningappears to be beyond the reach ofthe leadership of the warringgroups. The Sudan People’s Liber-ation Army might have won thewar against the North but hasstruggled to win the peace. Underthe charismatic leadership of itsformer president; John Garange, itsought to be inclusive and progres-sive; a model for the future state.

Garange was killed in mysteri-ous circumstances in a helicoptercrash in 2006 and since then theSPLA has struggled to containethnic divisions. It has also in-creasingly come under Americaninfluence. Washington has one eyeon a potential regional ally and an-other on the country’s extensiveoil reserves. While the SPLA hasmoved to the right since JohnGarang’s death shedding some ofits earlier progressive baggage inexchange for American dollars theleft does have a growing voice andinfluence in the country in theform of the Communist Part ofSouth Sudan.

Communist MPsIt is worth pointing out that upuntil the military coup whichbanned the party in 1989 the Com-munist Party had a number ofMPs including the MP for Juba;the current South Sudan capital. Inthe current conflict, the party hasbeen highly critical of the SPLA,accusing it of abandoning its pre-vious role as liberation movement,allowing ethnic division to fester,

and of being mired in corruptionand incompetence. Instead they propose a pro-gramme of progressive nationbuilding which rises above ethnicdivision, promotes democracyand human rights, argues thecountry’s huge potential wealthshould be used for the benefit ofthe people and seeks to find alliesloyal to the more progressive tra-ditions of African liberation. The positive news is that theleadership of both sides, havingstared into the abyss, appear towant a negotiated solution. Thisis also true of neighbouringstates; particularly Uganda, fear-ful that the conflict might spreadbeyond South Sudan. The key isbringing a halt to the fighting be-fore it arrives at a point of return.

• Bill Bonnar worked in Sudanup until the 1989 militarycoup. A member of theSudanese Communist Party,he lived mostly in the DarfurRegion and visited what isnow South Sudan on anumber of occasions

END TO FIGHTING IS FIRSTPRIORITY IN SOUTH SUDAN

SOUTH SUDAN: has little in the way ofinfrastructure or economic developmentand has had to cope with the legacy of ageneration of war including hundreds ofthousands of deaths and around twomillion internal refugees

facebook.com/[email protected]

Issue 43017th - 30th January 2014

for Socialism, Independenceand Internationalism

by Richie Venton

FUTURE HISTORIANSwill brand 2013 the year of theBedroom Tax. Anyone with aconscience will include it’sabolition in their New Yearresolutions. And this viciousassault on society’s poorest,including sick and disabledpeople, descended into chaosas Hogmanay marked the endof a year scarred by increasedpoverty and Tory benefits theft. The Westminster

government failed to amendprevious housing legislationwhen they implemented theBedroom Tax, leaving aloophole that exempts alltenants who have lived in thesame home since 1996. This was first spotted in a

Tribunal in Exeter city, wherethey’ve found 4.5 per cent ofall the tenants hit by theBedroom Tax are not liable topay it, and are therefore due afull refund on payments made.

Little victoryOne housing expert has

calculated at least 40,000tenants across the UK stand togain the return of the moneythey scrimped, saved andsuffered to fork out in BedroomTax instalments... a figure hedescribes as “a conservativeestimate”. On average theyshould get back £640. To add spice to this small

victory against the upper-classTory/Lib Dem thugs andthieves, some of the sametenants were awardedDiscretionary Housing

Payments to help them meetthe Bedroom Tax deductions,and they will be allowed tokeep the DHP payments! But far more serious, indeed

absolutely heartbreaking, isthe fact these Tory animalspushed through a tax on thepoorest that forced thousandsof people to go without properheating or food, compelledmany of them to uprootthemselves and move houseand, in the most tragic cases,to end their lives in poverty,stress and despair... when allalong they were not evenlegally liable to pay.

Blood on their handsDisabled Solihull

grandmother Stephanie Bottrillwalked out in front of a lorry onthe M6 last May, leaving anote for her son saying “Don’tblame yourself for me endingmy life. The only people toblame are the government”. Stephanie couldn’t take the

stress of a £20 a week cut toher pitiful benefits income. But she wasn’t even liable,

as she’d been a tenant since1995 in the home she wasthen hammered for living in –by millionaires living inmansions. Her son Steven hasrightly accused Tory IainDuncan Smith of having hismother’s blood on her hands. Anti-Bedroom Tax

campaigners need to assisttenants in claiming their legalexemption and full refunds ofpayments made – rapidly!Because the cynical Torieshave declared their intent to

swiftly close the legalloophole. Labour politicianshave rightly condemned this.But they are overwhelminglytwo-faced charlatans,considering it was Labour ingovernment in 2008 whichinvented the diluted forerunnerto the Bedroom Tax for privatesector tenants; it was thesame Labour Party which didsweet FA to outlaw evictions oreven promise to scrap it for sixmonths after it wasimplemented; and 47 LabourMPs (including ten fromScottish constituencies) didn’t

even think it aserious enough issue tobother turning up to vote for aLabour Motion to abolish theBedroom Tax which we hadpounded them into lodging inparliament in November. The SSP and other anti-

Bedroom Tax campaigners aredetermined to bury this viciousTory tax on the poorest. We can’t afford to wait until

after the 2015 Westminsterelections in the hope ofpossibly getting a Labourgovernment to scrap it – noruntil 2016 for an independentScottish Government to rid usof this daylight robbery. Pledgeto make 2014 the year webanish the Bedroom Tax.

BANISH THE BEDROOMTAX IN 2014

TAX VICTIM:Stephanie Bottrill took herown life after the Coalition’svicious tax robbed her of £20out of her pitiful benefits

Documents

choose yes. - WordPress.com...choose yes. 2014 choose to stay part of the Uk. choose trident nuclear weapons on your doorstep. choose zero hours contracts. choose the bedroom tax