Wednesday, 1 September 2010
Why are people not more angry with the bankers?
The question that occurs as the Coalition Government announces one cut after another is why are people not more angry about the bankers?It was afterall they who largely created the deficit in the first place. The taxpayer was forced to step in to bail out the bankers or see the whole system crash. The consequences were thought too dire to apprehend: cash machines no longer giving out money, businesses unable to access credit and quite rapidly the whole system declining into anarchy. The banks had to be saved, which the Labour Government of the day did by effectively nationalising a number of them.It was from this point that the problems started. The government should have taken effective control of the banks and how they operate. Instead, it allowed management teams in the banks to pretty much continue as before. The system was fixed so that not even the banks could fail to restore their institutions to profit. Interest rates were cut but the banks were not forced to pass the cuts on to morgage holders. What they did was partially pass on the cuts to borrowers while handing them on in full to savers. Instead of making credit available to struggling businesses they shut up shop. Meanwhile, as bank balance sheets started to be restored they continued with business as usual regarding the payment of high salaries and huge bonuses to themselves.Why did the government not insist on the banks that it owned opened up credit lines to business? Why were savers, many of whom include the elderly, so savagely hit? The banks should have been made instruments of social justice, operating for the common good. Instead, they have been effectively bailed out by the taxpayer and then continued with business as usual. Losses have been effectively nationalised, while profits continue to be privatised at the behest of the market.The Coaliton Government, with its cuts agenda, has creatred a process, whereby the poorer members of society are being made to pay for the largesse of the rich.The Coaliton Government together with many complient voices in the media has done its best to blame the deficit on the past government. It was the profligacy of Labour that caused this crisis, so the story goes. This is a less than subtle PR line designed no doubt to soften the blow of making the mass of people pay for the avarice of the rich. It is much easier to sell a line that blames the last government rather than the bankers. If the bankers were blaimed all of the time then there might be a lot more anger around and less acceptance that everyone else should pay for the behaviour of this small group of irresponsible individuals.This is not ofcourse to say that the last government was blameless. The weakening of the regulatory framework by splitting the task between the Bank of England, Treasury and Financial Services Authority made the crisis far more likely to happen. Had Prime Minister Gordon Brown not been quite so enthralled with City bankers in suits then much of the damage could no doubt have been avoided.What the banking crisis should teach is just how close society now resides to the precipice. Anarchy was not far away in the autumn of 2008, as the banks threatened to crash on mass. There needs to be a step back taken to look at how our society is organised and in the interests of whom. An examination of Catholic Social Teaching could well provide a way forward. CST emphasises the need to work for the Common Good. The Church teaches that people are here to adminster wealth on behalf of the mass of people, not monopolise it on behalf of a small group of the priveliged. There needs to be some responsibility exercised in plotting the way forward. If this path of action is not taken there is every chance that next time the banks or some similar key institutions crashes there will be no second chance. There will be anarchy on the streets and the law of the jungle will reign to the detriment of all. There needs to be fundamental change now, not simply putting the wheels back on a vehicle that is already broken.
Friday, 20 August 2010
Community organisers must not be compromised by government money
Community organising has been very much in the ascent since the Coalition Government came to power proclaiming its Big Society agenda.
Prior to the election, Conservative Party leader David Cameron made no secret of his admiration, pledging to create a National Centre for Community Organising and fund the training to be carried out by “independent third parties such as London Citizens UK, who have proven track records in training community organisers and activists.”
Now in power the plan to fund the training of community organisers appears set to move ahead with Neil Jameson, the executive director of London Citizens and Citizens UK, an early visitor at a Downing Street reception. “We have been talking to the Coalition Government about the work we do,” said Jameson, who was keen to emphasis that the organisation would not be giving up any of its independence if it took up the state’s shilling.
Jameson explained that Citizens UK, the parent body of London Citizens, would be offering professional training in community organising at a cost to government. At present this training comes free to those who form part of its 150 strong membership organisations. This training has also been offered on a subsidised basis to the likes of the Oxfam, the Salvation Army and Church organisations.
The concern of many is that the organisation could be compromised or co-opted if it gets too closely embroiled with government.
Community organising as practiced by London Citizens has taken off in the capital over recent years. The work began in the early 1990s, drawing on the community organising model of Saul Alinsky in 1930s Chicago.
Community organising is about bringing people together and empowering them to achieved change in their own lives through political activism. It seeks to build relationships with those who hold the power and by direct civil action if the initial approaches fail. The most famous US son of the movement is President Barack Obama who trained as an organiser when younger.
The first organisation in the UK was The East London Communities Organisation (telco). Set up in 1996, it proved successful in bringing together different faith groups, schools, trade unions and other community based bodies.
South London Citizens and West London Citizens followed Telco. It is planned that North London Citizens will come into being over the next 12 months. Outside the capital the organisation was less successful, setting up in Liverpool, North Wales, the Black Country, Sheffield and Bristol. None of these survived, withering due to lack of funding to support sufficient organisers in the regions. “I guess we grew too quickly in the early 1990s,”said Jameson. “The first generation of organisers were on their own in the city where they worked. If the organisation does not encourage political action then it ceases to exist.”
The organisation has since retrenched in London looking to build its strength before once again expanding outside the capital. “Ideally we would like £120,000 in the bank before organisers relocate. Then they would work their butts off to achieve the aims,” said Jameson, who confirms plans to extend out to Cardiff and Milton Keynes over the next 12 months.
In London, the organisation seems to have gone from strength to strength. Membership organisations pay annual fees ranging between £600 and £1800 depending on size. For this the leaders of the membership organisation receive training and become involved in campaigns at local and national level. LC also gets funding from a number of trusts.
Among the national campaigns have been the living wage and Strangers into Citizens. The living wage campaign started in east London with research funded by Unison looking at the amount required per hour to live above the poverty line.
The campaign involved direct meetings with the heads of the likes of HSBC Bank and then direct actions at branch level. Successes followed with Barclays Bank becoming a particular advocate of the living wage for its lower paid workers in the cleaning sector. NHS trusts were also targeted, resulting in cleaners and security guards winning better wages. Finally, London Mayor Ken Livingstone took up the cause, creating a living wage unit in his office that set the living wage level for all of those employed by the Greater London Authority. Boris Johnson continued the work when he took over as Mayor, most recently setting the rate at £7.60 an hour. The campaign claims to have put £20 million in the pockets of the lowest paid families since 2001.
Johnson also became a flag waver for another leading campaign to regularise undocumented workers. He supported the Strangers into Citizens campaign that is seeking an earned amnesty for people who have been undocumented and worked here for a number of years. The Liberal Democrats also picked up the sentiments of this campaign during the election with their call for an amnesty for undocumented workers.
At more local level community organising means working with the police and others for safer streets, cheaper housing and better environment.
The power of community organising in bringing politicians to account is best seen at the assemblies. These are huge stage-managed affairs, attracting a couple of thousand people. Two of the most recent held at Westminster Central Hall were for the national party leaders prior to the general election and before that for London Mayoral candidates. The candidates were asked pre-arranged questions, put by selected leaders from the platform. It is about publically holding the politicians to account. There is no debate and no questions from the floor. The assemblies provide a great photo opportunity for the media of democracy at work but in reality are controlled with iron discipline. Member organisations commit to bring a number of people with them and are held to that pledge.
One member of a housing charity recalled that when they turned up with six rather than the pledged 10 people it was “a bit like being put on the naughty step.”
”There is a Stalinistic feel,” he said. Some member organisations also challenge the democracy of London Citizens. One deputy head teacher of a primary school recalled back in 2004, the first assembly that brought together Telco and South London Citizens. The packed meeting were to vote on seven areas to work on. The top four would go ahead for implementation. Seventh in the voting was the London Olympics, yet within a couple of months the hierarchy of London Citizens seemed somehow to have elevated the Olympics to top spot.
One Catholic priest thinks the organisation addresses middle class issues, not necessarily those of the community where they exist. He feels they adopt campaigns and then shuffle them according to political expediency. "They don't stick with issues, only those they can win and get kudos for," said the priest, who also saw the danger of co-option in taking government money to train community organisers. “There will be questions as to who will be boss, if the government is paying they will decide, not the community.”
Jameson though remains steadfast on this point, insisting community organising is about civil society. “We want to work with those on the side of civil society rather than the state,” said Jameson.
There is though clearly concern about co-option by government, if too much funding is accepted. Funding always comes with strings attached. Perhaps one sign of growing disquiet is the declining role of trade unions in London Citizens. At one point there were 20 branches from Unison, PCS and the Unite, today this has reduced to eight. Union branches also used to be well represented at assemblies, now there are few to be seen – replaced it would seem by school children.
Could the reduction have anything to do with the fact that in the case of the public sector some see the London Citizens getting into bed with a government that is committed to putting a good number of their members out of work?
Jameson though has a different explanation, saying that the unions saw things in a very single issue way. So there would be a campaign at a hospital for the living wage, “once this was achieved, they said thanks and we’re off.”
Whatever the cause there is certainly some soul searching going amongst those involved in community organising. This form of political organisation has made great strides, engaging faith communities in real action that has achieved change like the living wage. Large numbers have been mobilised. The danger now is that in taking government money, much of this work could be compromised. The growing concerns about internal democracy may also be causing some to question the work of community organising. Whatever the truth, it must be hoped that the astute leadership of London Citizens are aware of the dangers and do not risk destroying what has so far been a positive experiment in real grass root citizens activism.
Prior to the election, Conservative Party leader David Cameron made no secret of his admiration, pledging to create a National Centre for Community Organising and fund the training to be carried out by “independent third parties such as London Citizens UK, who have proven track records in training community organisers and activists.”
Now in power the plan to fund the training of community organisers appears set to move ahead with Neil Jameson, the executive director of London Citizens and Citizens UK, an early visitor at a Downing Street reception. “We have been talking to the Coalition Government about the work we do,” said Jameson, who was keen to emphasis that the organisation would not be giving up any of its independence if it took up the state’s shilling.
Jameson explained that Citizens UK, the parent body of London Citizens, would be offering professional training in community organising at a cost to government. At present this training comes free to those who form part of its 150 strong membership organisations. This training has also been offered on a subsidised basis to the likes of the Oxfam, the Salvation Army and Church organisations.
The concern of many is that the organisation could be compromised or co-opted if it gets too closely embroiled with government.
Community organising as practiced by London Citizens has taken off in the capital over recent years. The work began in the early 1990s, drawing on the community organising model of Saul Alinsky in 1930s Chicago.
Community organising is about bringing people together and empowering them to achieved change in their own lives through political activism. It seeks to build relationships with those who hold the power and by direct civil action if the initial approaches fail. The most famous US son of the movement is President Barack Obama who trained as an organiser when younger.
The first organisation in the UK was The East London Communities Organisation (telco). Set up in 1996, it proved successful in bringing together different faith groups, schools, trade unions and other community based bodies.
South London Citizens and West London Citizens followed Telco. It is planned that North London Citizens will come into being over the next 12 months. Outside the capital the organisation was less successful, setting up in Liverpool, North Wales, the Black Country, Sheffield and Bristol. None of these survived, withering due to lack of funding to support sufficient organisers in the regions. “I guess we grew too quickly in the early 1990s,”said Jameson. “The first generation of organisers were on their own in the city where they worked. If the organisation does not encourage political action then it ceases to exist.”
The organisation has since retrenched in London looking to build its strength before once again expanding outside the capital. “Ideally we would like £120,000 in the bank before organisers relocate. Then they would work their butts off to achieve the aims,” said Jameson, who confirms plans to extend out to Cardiff and Milton Keynes over the next 12 months.
In London, the organisation seems to have gone from strength to strength. Membership organisations pay annual fees ranging between £600 and £1800 depending on size. For this the leaders of the membership organisation receive training and become involved in campaigns at local and national level. LC also gets funding from a number of trusts.
Among the national campaigns have been the living wage and Strangers into Citizens. The living wage campaign started in east London with research funded by Unison looking at the amount required per hour to live above the poverty line.
The campaign involved direct meetings with the heads of the likes of HSBC Bank and then direct actions at branch level. Successes followed with Barclays Bank becoming a particular advocate of the living wage for its lower paid workers in the cleaning sector. NHS trusts were also targeted, resulting in cleaners and security guards winning better wages. Finally, London Mayor Ken Livingstone took up the cause, creating a living wage unit in his office that set the living wage level for all of those employed by the Greater London Authority. Boris Johnson continued the work when he took over as Mayor, most recently setting the rate at £7.60 an hour. The campaign claims to have put £20 million in the pockets of the lowest paid families since 2001.
Johnson also became a flag waver for another leading campaign to regularise undocumented workers. He supported the Strangers into Citizens campaign that is seeking an earned amnesty for people who have been undocumented and worked here for a number of years. The Liberal Democrats also picked up the sentiments of this campaign during the election with their call for an amnesty for undocumented workers.
At more local level community organising means working with the police and others for safer streets, cheaper housing and better environment.
The power of community organising in bringing politicians to account is best seen at the assemblies. These are huge stage-managed affairs, attracting a couple of thousand people. Two of the most recent held at Westminster Central Hall were for the national party leaders prior to the general election and before that for London Mayoral candidates. The candidates were asked pre-arranged questions, put by selected leaders from the platform. It is about publically holding the politicians to account. There is no debate and no questions from the floor. The assemblies provide a great photo opportunity for the media of democracy at work but in reality are controlled with iron discipline. Member organisations commit to bring a number of people with them and are held to that pledge.
One member of a housing charity recalled that when they turned up with six rather than the pledged 10 people it was “a bit like being put on the naughty step.”
”There is a Stalinistic feel,” he said. Some member organisations also challenge the democracy of London Citizens. One deputy head teacher of a primary school recalled back in 2004, the first assembly that brought together Telco and South London Citizens. The packed meeting were to vote on seven areas to work on. The top four would go ahead for implementation. Seventh in the voting was the London Olympics, yet within a couple of months the hierarchy of London Citizens seemed somehow to have elevated the Olympics to top spot.
One Catholic priest thinks the organisation addresses middle class issues, not necessarily those of the community where they exist. He feels they adopt campaigns and then shuffle them according to political expediency. "They don't stick with issues, only those they can win and get kudos for," said the priest, who also saw the danger of co-option in taking government money to train community organisers. “There will be questions as to who will be boss, if the government is paying they will decide, not the community.”
Jameson though remains steadfast on this point, insisting community organising is about civil society. “We want to work with those on the side of civil society rather than the state,” said Jameson.
There is though clearly concern about co-option by government, if too much funding is accepted. Funding always comes with strings attached. Perhaps one sign of growing disquiet is the declining role of trade unions in London Citizens. At one point there were 20 branches from Unison, PCS and the Unite, today this has reduced to eight. Union branches also used to be well represented at assemblies, now there are few to be seen – replaced it would seem by school children.
Could the reduction have anything to do with the fact that in the case of the public sector some see the London Citizens getting into bed with a government that is committed to putting a good number of their members out of work?
Jameson though has a different explanation, saying that the unions saw things in a very single issue way. So there would be a campaign at a hospital for the living wage, “once this was achieved, they said thanks and we’re off.”
Whatever the cause there is certainly some soul searching going amongst those involved in community organising. This form of political organisation has made great strides, engaging faith communities in real action that has achieved change like the living wage. Large numbers have been mobilised. The danger now is that in taking government money, much of this work could be compromised. The growing concerns about internal democracy may also be causing some to question the work of community organising. Whatever the truth, it must be hoped that the astute leadership of London Citizens are aware of the dangers and do not risk destroying what has so far been a positive experiment in real grass root citizens activism.
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Defiance in the face of house demolition
The house of Salim and Arabiya Shawamreh has been demolished three times by the Israeli army over the past 14 years.
The Palestinian couple, with the help of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), have rebuilt the house three times. The last occasion was in 2001, when the house was designated as a peace centre.
Salim takes up the story of the struggle, he, his wife Arabiya and their six children have had to establish a home in Anata, East Jerusalem. “ I went by the book, applying three times for a building permit between 1990 and 1994. First, I was told I was outside the zone and planning area for the village,” said Salim, who revealed how the Israeli authorities continually push to keep Palestinians in the designated village areas so that the rest of the land is open for Israeli settlers.
The second time he applied, he was denied the permit because the authorities said the land sloped. “I could have flattened the area out very quickly with one of the bulldozers that they use to knock down our houses,” said Salim.
The third denial was because the authorities said there were two signatures missing on the application for a permit. A solicitor tried over several months to get details of the names but without success.
Every time Salim applied for the permit, it cost US$5,000. In the end Salim just got on and built his house. Things were ok for a while but then on 9 July 1998, there was a big commotion outside. “They had brought 300 soldiers to demolish our house. We were given 15 minutes to get out before the bulldozers moved in,” recalled Salim. “I protested and got kicked to the ground. My wife and children stayed inside the house and were attacked with teargas.”
The house was flattened. “We had planted 52 trees around the home. We had chickens and ducks,” said Salim. “The trees were cut down, the animals killed. We were left with nothing.”
The Red Cross gave the family a tent and the ICAHD came along. The family decided with the ICAHD to rebuild the house. The shell was up inside a month but then the army arrived again. “The soldiers came at 4 am in the morning with machine guns and bulldozers. The house was demolished for a second time and the tent taken. We were told we had to have permission for the tent from the Israeli authorities,” said Salim.
Israelis and Palestinians came together again to rebuild the house. It was completed on 9 July 1999. Two months passed and no demolition. The Shawamreh family moved in to the house. Then on 4 April 2001, they woke to find it once again surrounded by soldiers with two bulldozers. “The area was surrounded, the furniture thrown into the street and the house demolished,” said Salim.
The house was then rebuilt again. It was agreed with the ICAHD that it would be used as a peace centre. It was completed in July 2003 and has remained standing since that time, though a demolition order was placed on the propery in June 2009.
Arabiya recalled the problems that the children endured as a result of the demolition. “The children regressed at school. They had psychological problems, waking up in the night crying and screaming,” said Arabiya. The children who were young at the time of the demolitons were most severely effected, with her younger children doing better later at school. “I wish there could be peace and we could live normally,” said Arabiya.
The Israeli authorities have overseen the demolition of 24,000 homes, making 160,000 people homeless, since 1967. “Only 8 per cent of the demolitions are anything to do with security,” said Linda Ramsden, the director of ICAHD UK. “It is about dispossessing the Palestinian people, putting them into Bantustans.”
Linda explained how the ICAHD formed in 1997 from the peace movement in Israel. It was made up of those Israelis appalled at the way its government was treating the Palestinians. They went to the Palestinians and asked how they could help. The rebuilding of houses was agreed upon as the best thing they could do.
Linda explained how in the early days, the ICAHD would get notice of a house demolition and people would go to chain onto the building. “Now though the Israeli forces cordon off the street so we can’t get near to the houses, though we try to block the way,” said Linda, who revealed how this slowed the demolitons down and helped bring the actions to the attention of the international community.
The ICAHD has managed to rebuild 162 houses in the West Bank and east Jerusalem area over the past 13 years. Just 12 of these houses have been demolished by the Israeli authorities.
There have been casualties on the way with US citizen Rachel Corrie among those killed while undertaking the work.
The houses are rebuilt all of the time but the ICAHD has a focus on a summer camp that takes place over two weeks in July each year. At this time people come in from across the world to help with the work. Last year, some 43 Spanish people took part with the Spanish government paying for the whole project. This year there are people coming from the UK, US, Ireland, Spain and Switzerland for the camp. “The summer camps offer the opportunity to join with Israelis and Palestinians in rebuilding a house over two weeks. Then the house is handed over to the family,” said Linda.
Salim explains the house rebuilding programme very much in terms of political resistance. “We tell the families that maybe they will get their home, maybe not. They and us maybe arrested. The promise is that we will not leave them. If we have to rebuild the house ten times we will,” said Salim, who says the Israeli authorities think twice before attacking the area if they know there are people from other countries there supporting and doing the work. Salim recalled how the Israeli criticised the Spanish government over the housebuilding last year. “They have also tried to close down ICAHD and stop people sending money,” said Salim, who wants people in the UK to help the Palestinians to get justice. “We need to get this occupation off our backs. We would ask people to boycott Israeli goods because they are coming from the settlements. They are coming from stolen land, from the blood of the people,” said Salim.
* For more information see ICAHD UK, PO BOX 371 Leatherhead KT22 2EUTel: 05602 409976 info@icahduk.org www.icahduk.org
The Palestinian couple, with the help of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), have rebuilt the house three times. The last occasion was in 2001, when the house was designated as a peace centre.
Salim takes up the story of the struggle, he, his wife Arabiya and their six children have had to establish a home in Anata, East Jerusalem. “ I went by the book, applying three times for a building permit between 1990 and 1994. First, I was told I was outside the zone and planning area for the village,” said Salim, who revealed how the Israeli authorities continually push to keep Palestinians in the designated village areas so that the rest of the land is open for Israeli settlers.
The second time he applied, he was denied the permit because the authorities said the land sloped. “I could have flattened the area out very quickly with one of the bulldozers that they use to knock down our houses,” said Salim.
The third denial was because the authorities said there were two signatures missing on the application for a permit. A solicitor tried over several months to get details of the names but without success.
Every time Salim applied for the permit, it cost US$5,000. In the end Salim just got on and built his house. Things were ok for a while but then on 9 July 1998, there was a big commotion outside. “They had brought 300 soldiers to demolish our house. We were given 15 minutes to get out before the bulldozers moved in,” recalled Salim. “I protested and got kicked to the ground. My wife and children stayed inside the house and were attacked with teargas.”
The house was flattened. “We had planted 52 trees around the home. We had chickens and ducks,” said Salim. “The trees were cut down, the animals killed. We were left with nothing.”
The Red Cross gave the family a tent and the ICAHD came along. The family decided with the ICAHD to rebuild the house. The shell was up inside a month but then the army arrived again. “The soldiers came at 4 am in the morning with machine guns and bulldozers. The house was demolished for a second time and the tent taken. We were told we had to have permission for the tent from the Israeli authorities,” said Salim.
Israelis and Palestinians came together again to rebuild the house. It was completed on 9 July 1999. Two months passed and no demolition. The Shawamreh family moved in to the house. Then on 4 April 2001, they woke to find it once again surrounded by soldiers with two bulldozers. “The area was surrounded, the furniture thrown into the street and the house demolished,” said Salim.
The house was then rebuilt again. It was agreed with the ICAHD that it would be used as a peace centre. It was completed in July 2003 and has remained standing since that time, though a demolition order was placed on the propery in June 2009.
Arabiya recalled the problems that the children endured as a result of the demolition. “The children regressed at school. They had psychological problems, waking up in the night crying and screaming,” said Arabiya. The children who were young at the time of the demolitons were most severely effected, with her younger children doing better later at school. “I wish there could be peace and we could live normally,” said Arabiya.
The Israeli authorities have overseen the demolition of 24,000 homes, making 160,000 people homeless, since 1967. “Only 8 per cent of the demolitions are anything to do with security,” said Linda Ramsden, the director of ICAHD UK. “It is about dispossessing the Palestinian people, putting them into Bantustans.”
Linda explained how the ICAHD formed in 1997 from the peace movement in Israel. It was made up of those Israelis appalled at the way its government was treating the Palestinians. They went to the Palestinians and asked how they could help. The rebuilding of houses was agreed upon as the best thing they could do.
Linda explained how in the early days, the ICAHD would get notice of a house demolition and people would go to chain onto the building. “Now though the Israeli forces cordon off the street so we can’t get near to the houses, though we try to block the way,” said Linda, who revealed how this slowed the demolitons down and helped bring the actions to the attention of the international community.
The ICAHD has managed to rebuild 162 houses in the West Bank and east Jerusalem area over the past 13 years. Just 12 of these houses have been demolished by the Israeli authorities.
There have been casualties on the way with US citizen Rachel Corrie among those killed while undertaking the work.
The houses are rebuilt all of the time but the ICAHD has a focus on a summer camp that takes place over two weeks in July each year. At this time people come in from across the world to help with the work. Last year, some 43 Spanish people took part with the Spanish government paying for the whole project. This year there are people coming from the UK, US, Ireland, Spain and Switzerland for the camp. “The summer camps offer the opportunity to join with Israelis and Palestinians in rebuilding a house over two weeks. Then the house is handed over to the family,” said Linda.
Salim explains the house rebuilding programme very much in terms of political resistance. “We tell the families that maybe they will get their home, maybe not. They and us maybe arrested. The promise is that we will not leave them. If we have to rebuild the house ten times we will,” said Salim, who says the Israeli authorities think twice before attacking the area if they know there are people from other countries there supporting and doing the work. Salim recalled how the Israeli criticised the Spanish government over the housebuilding last year. “They have also tried to close down ICAHD and stop people sending money,” said Salim, who wants people in the UK to help the Palestinians to get justice. “We need to get this occupation off our backs. We would ask people to boycott Israeli goods because they are coming from the settlements. They are coming from stolen land, from the blood of the people,” said Salim.
* For more information see ICAHD UK, PO BOX 371 Leatherhead KT22 2EUTel: 05602 409976 info@icahduk.org www.icahduk.org
Saturday, 7 August 2010
Transition town initiatives need encouragement
There is much going on at a local level to address climate change and reduce oil dependency.This is important because as the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico proves, it is getting more dangerous and difficult to obtain oil from the earth. Where once oil was regarded as an infinite resource, it is now clear that this is not the case.The point when oil supplies are set to peak is now predicted for 2015. Things may even be worse as there seems to be some doubt as to the validity of figures concerning oil reserves. Many do not realise just how dependent the world is on oil, it is not just a matter of running cars or heating. Some 97 per cent of all our food is oil dependent. Plastic is an oil derivative product. Clothes and shelter are linked up with oil.So the lack of oil is a serious problem in terms of development and survival. Add in the devastating effect that using oil has in terms of climate change and a vicious circle is complete.
Fortunately, there are things happening to address oil dependency. The transition town initiative has built a model that people can use to reduce oil dependency.
There are now more than 180 such intitiatives across the country, including places as diverse as Totnes, Lewes and Exeter. The idea involves a small group of people coming together to discuss ways in which the local area can become more self sufficient and less dependent on oil. It is about building resilience, ready for the day when oil really does become scarce.
For the transition initiative to work, more people must become involved. This can be done initially by showing films, raising awareness about issues like climate crisis and peak oil. Then there must be a move to action.In Exeter, there have been a number of initiatives taken including buying four acres of land for a community farm. Anyone is welcome to come and take part. A couple of farms outside Exeter have also got involved, agreeing to solely supply organic products for the local community. The next move is to raise £190,000 that will enable the purchase of a property that will become a not-for profit co-operative store providng local organically produced food for the people. There are other initiatives to teach people how to produce their own crops and cook. Many of what were once the basic skills of life have been lost in a supermarket led fast food world, where sticking ready prepared meals in the oven has become the norm. Among the farming community there is increasing sympathy for transition style initiatives. One Cornish farmer, Victor Barry, has been farming organically for years. This has meant using horses to plough his fields, thereby cutting the carbon footprint to nil.The transition initiatives also take in other elements of local life like transport and energy systems. Some towns have gone as far as bringing in their own energy generating means like wind turbines, others have sort co-operation with energy companies to work more sustainably.So there is much going on but more needs to happen if the country is to ween itself off oil and save the planet - why delay?
Fortunately, there are things happening to address oil dependency. The transition town initiative has built a model that people can use to reduce oil dependency.
There are now more than 180 such intitiatives across the country, including places as diverse as Totnes, Lewes and Exeter. The idea involves a small group of people coming together to discuss ways in which the local area can become more self sufficient and less dependent on oil. It is about building resilience, ready for the day when oil really does become scarce.
For the transition initiative to work, more people must become involved. This can be done initially by showing films, raising awareness about issues like climate crisis and peak oil. Then there must be a move to action.In Exeter, there have been a number of initiatives taken including buying four acres of land for a community farm. Anyone is welcome to come and take part. A couple of farms outside Exeter have also got involved, agreeing to solely supply organic products for the local community. The next move is to raise £190,000 that will enable the purchase of a property that will become a not-for profit co-operative store providng local organically produced food for the people. There are other initiatives to teach people how to produce their own crops and cook. Many of what were once the basic skills of life have been lost in a supermarket led fast food world, where sticking ready prepared meals in the oven has become the norm. Among the farming community there is increasing sympathy for transition style initiatives. One Cornish farmer, Victor Barry, has been farming organically for years. This has meant using horses to plough his fields, thereby cutting the carbon footprint to nil.The transition initiatives also take in other elements of local life like transport and energy systems. Some towns have gone as far as bringing in their own energy generating means like wind turbines, others have sort co-operation with energy companies to work more sustainably.So there is much going on but more needs to happen if the country is to ween itself off oil and save the planet - why delay?
Thursday, 29 July 2010
Justice & Peace activism in need of formation
The recent annual National Justice and Peace Network conference drew more than 350 people to spend a weekend debating food security. It was a great opportunity to network with others working for social justice across the Church and beyond.
A question that sprang to mind was just how is the work of social justice in the Church being conducted at present? Attending the NJPN conferences it is difficult not to see it as an ageing movement, still made up of the children of the 1960s and 70s. This generation has faithfully struggled to live out the teachings of Vatican II but where are the new people, where’s the renewal?How many parishes actually operate justice and peace groups now? The commitment at diocesan level is certainly pretty sketchy with few diocese having workers and some lacking commissions. There is a definite belief amongst the hierarchy that while doing social justice is a constituent part of practicing the faith, but in terms of resourcing it is an added extra that can be done without. CAFOD has been a big backer of justice and peace over the years, providing funding for workers and the NJPN. Recently though CAFOD has seemed less enthusiastic in its support, whilst continuing to utilise the very valuable network that NJPN offers. A more recent player to emerge on the scene has been the Citizens Organising Foundation (COF) with its community organising via groups like London Citizens. This has proved a good way of getting whole parishes and schools signed up to the work of social justice. The living wage, regularisation of undocumented workers and debt reduction have all been valuable campaigns. Many J&P activists are active members of this organisation which is planning to expand out across the UK.What is lacking though is any real formation of people engaged in the work of social justice. The days when CAFOD actively pushed the pastoral cycle with its experience, analysis reflection, action and celebration aspects seem long gone.
The pastoral cycle was widely used by Christian communities pursuing justice based on liberation theology in Latin America. There was real formation in terms of social justice and the political sphere in which it operates, centred on a firm foundation of Church teaching.
Now unfortunately such formation work has given way to rather superficial campaigns that often involve deluging government ministers with postcards imploring them to act. Whilst this has a place, it should be an end in itself. It needs underpinning with justice theology and should be seen as a starting point to go on to something else.Community organising is no better at providing a process for the formation of people. It targets people in parishes with control of the purse strings. Once signed up, a few people are selected for leadership sessions but the organisation as a whole operates in a very disciplined hierarchial way. Member schools and parishes are summoned to fill out big halls for assemblies that are incredibly stage managed affairs, with no questions from the floor allowed. Community organising is more of a method than a process.
It was process and formation of people in the work of social justice that used to be so prevalent in justice and peace. This seems to have been lost. It is almost like running around like headless chickens wanting "to do" all of the time without any reflection or analysis. There is a feeling if we do enough - whether that is buying fair trade products, marching, protesting or acting ethically - then the world will become a better place. Whilst at one level this is no doubt true, at another the question of why the world is not a better place arises, and what motivates people to wish that it would.
The challenge for J&P is to get that process of formation back, that ability to analyse what is going on in the world and work out a process as to how to inculcate transformative kingdom values into that world.
There is an urgent need for these formation processes to begin again at a number of levels. There is the challenge of getting more people involved. Then there is the challenge of how people are moved on once they become engaged. Many want quick fixes, rather than putting in the time, looking at the structural causes of the problems and acting. Work for social justice is a lifelong commitment not a quick fix.
It is high time that the Church recognised this commitment and devoted some proper resources to the formation of communities steeped in social justice. At present this vital work is being too easily sidelined
A question that sprang to mind was just how is the work of social justice in the Church being conducted at present? Attending the NJPN conferences it is difficult not to see it as an ageing movement, still made up of the children of the 1960s and 70s. This generation has faithfully struggled to live out the teachings of Vatican II but where are the new people, where’s the renewal?How many parishes actually operate justice and peace groups now? The commitment at diocesan level is certainly pretty sketchy with few diocese having workers and some lacking commissions. There is a definite belief amongst the hierarchy that while doing social justice is a constituent part of practicing the faith, but in terms of resourcing it is an added extra that can be done without. CAFOD has been a big backer of justice and peace over the years, providing funding for workers and the NJPN. Recently though CAFOD has seemed less enthusiastic in its support, whilst continuing to utilise the very valuable network that NJPN offers. A more recent player to emerge on the scene has been the Citizens Organising Foundation (COF) with its community organising via groups like London Citizens. This has proved a good way of getting whole parishes and schools signed up to the work of social justice. The living wage, regularisation of undocumented workers and debt reduction have all been valuable campaigns. Many J&P activists are active members of this organisation which is planning to expand out across the UK.What is lacking though is any real formation of people engaged in the work of social justice. The days when CAFOD actively pushed the pastoral cycle with its experience, analysis reflection, action and celebration aspects seem long gone.
The pastoral cycle was widely used by Christian communities pursuing justice based on liberation theology in Latin America. There was real formation in terms of social justice and the political sphere in which it operates, centred on a firm foundation of Church teaching.
Now unfortunately such formation work has given way to rather superficial campaigns that often involve deluging government ministers with postcards imploring them to act. Whilst this has a place, it should be an end in itself. It needs underpinning with justice theology and should be seen as a starting point to go on to something else.Community organising is no better at providing a process for the formation of people. It targets people in parishes with control of the purse strings. Once signed up, a few people are selected for leadership sessions but the organisation as a whole operates in a very disciplined hierarchial way. Member schools and parishes are summoned to fill out big halls for assemblies that are incredibly stage managed affairs, with no questions from the floor allowed. Community organising is more of a method than a process.
It was process and formation of people in the work of social justice that used to be so prevalent in justice and peace. This seems to have been lost. It is almost like running around like headless chickens wanting "to do" all of the time without any reflection or analysis. There is a feeling if we do enough - whether that is buying fair trade products, marching, protesting or acting ethically - then the world will become a better place. Whilst at one level this is no doubt true, at another the question of why the world is not a better place arises, and what motivates people to wish that it would.
The challenge for J&P is to get that process of formation back, that ability to analyse what is going on in the world and work out a process as to how to inculcate transformative kingdom values into that world.
There is an urgent need for these formation processes to begin again at a number of levels. There is the challenge of getting more people involved. Then there is the challenge of how people are moved on once they become engaged. Many want quick fixes, rather than putting in the time, looking at the structural causes of the problems and acting. Work for social justice is a lifelong commitment not a quick fix.
It is high time that the Church recognised this commitment and devoted some proper resources to the formation of communities steeped in social justice. At present this vital work is being too easily sidelined
Wednesday, 28 July 2010
Inaction sends the wrong message
The big danger of the failure to bring any action against police officers involved in the death of Ian Tomlinson is the message it conveys to other officers. There has been case after case over recent years of deaths in police custody and never do charges or disciplinary action materialise. Not surprisingly the deaths keep occurring, because the message to the police is that they are above the law. This is a dangerous situation for the public as it makes the streets less safe - due to the police
Wednesday, 14 July 2010
Terror review offers hope for restoration of liberty
The news that the coalition government has announced a review of anti-terror legislation including 28 day pre-charge detention offers hope for a return of some basic human rights.
The announcement was made to coincide with a decision to extend 28 day pre-charge detention for the six month period. A debate on renewal under the Prevention of Terrorism Act had to be undertaken by 25 July 2010.
The review will also include control orders and reform of Section 44 stop and search under the Terrorism Act 2000. The outcome of the review will be a real test of the coalition government’s colours regarding human rights. It follows on a Labour Government which was one of the most authoritarian in recent history.
To find the antecedents of 28 day pre-charge detention requires going back to the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings of 1974. The first Prevention of Terrorism Act was introduced following the Birmingham pub bombings. Described by then Home Secretary Roy Jenkins as "draconian" this piece of legislation brought in seven day pre-charge detention. One of the first people detained under its provision was Paul Hill of the Guildford Four, so it had a good record for entrapping the innocent from the off.
It was subsequently used over the years to detain hundreds of thousands of people at the ports, airports and beyond. The detention period could be anything from an hour to seven days. Some 86 per cent of people were released without charge. The way in which the PTA was used effectively made a suspect community of the Irish. It also had the effect of stopping people getting overtly involved in the politics of the North.
The PTA came up for renewal each year. In the early 1980s the Labour Party changed to opposing the renewal, only to later abstain when Tony Blair took over as shadow home secretary in the early 1990s.
The next major change for pre-charge detention came in 2000 with the passing into law of the Terrorism Act. At a time of unprecedented peace, pre-charge detention was extended to 14 days. The timing of this move coming as it just as the peace process was underway in the North and 9/11 had yet to happen, proved to many that anti-terror law had little to do with preventing terrorism and everything to do with cutting back on human rights.
After 9/11, the government made an even more audacious grab for liberties bringing in the Anti-terror crime and security act which allowed for the indefinite detention of foreign nationals if they were felt to pose a threat to national security and could not be deported.
In 2004, the law lords ruled this legislation to be unlawful, resulting in proposals to bring in control orders and 90 day pre-charge detention.
A mighty battle raged over the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act resulting in the creation of the control order regime and agreement to 28 day pre-charge detention. The Blair government was defeated over 90 day pre-charge detention. There was a further attempt to up pre-charge detention in October 2008 under Prime Minister Gordon Brown failed due to a combination of opposition and the overwhelming effect of the financial crisis.
Human rights organisation Liberty point out that no one has been held for longer than 14 days since October 2008.
Liberty also point out that Britain has the highest level of pre-charge detention in the western world, with the US and Spain having two days, Italy four days and Spain five days. "Six months in Whitehall passes a lot quicker than 28 days in a police cell without knowing why. The Coalition has bound itself together with the language of civil liberties. Now it must reduce the longest pre-charge detention period of any western democracy," said Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty.
How the Coalition government deals with the issue of control orders will be another test of its mettle on civil liberties. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats both opposed them in opposition. Then Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesman described control orders as “pure kafka” and “an affront to British justice.”
Liberty describe control orders as allowing “suspects to be indefinitely tagged, confined to their homes and banned from communicating with others without police interview, charge or trial.
“The effect of this legislation is that some people have been subject to detention and community punishment for over seven years on the basis of the Home Secretary’s suspicions and secret evidence which the suspect will never see.”
Concerns over backtracking by the new administration have surfaced with the revelation that two new control orders have been imposed on the Pakistani students Abid Naseer and Ahmed Faraz Khan. These two men won their appeal against being deported to Pakistan after no charges were brought against them relating to an alleged terror plot. Though the appeal was won the adjudicating body the Special Immigration Appeals Commission effectively branded them terrorists.
Three other control orders have been renewed bringing the total in force to 12. It will be interesting once the review is complete to see if control orders are banned and the paraphanalia of secret evidence the surrounds their imposition outlawed. Liberty are also submitting to the review that phone tap evidence should be admissible in court so making it easier to bring cases to court. The Coalition Government’s review offers hope of a rolling back of the anti-terror legislation and a restoration of liberty. However, a more cynical individual might suggest many of the most pernicious elements of these laws like control orders and 28 day pre-charge detention will simply be repackaged under new names or made “more accountable.” It would certainly be a rare thing to see a government giving back real liberty, after so many others having chipped away at this edifice for so long.
The announcement was made to coincide with a decision to extend 28 day pre-charge detention for the six month period. A debate on renewal under the Prevention of Terrorism Act had to be undertaken by 25 July 2010.
The review will also include control orders and reform of Section 44 stop and search under the Terrorism Act 2000. The outcome of the review will be a real test of the coalition government’s colours regarding human rights. It follows on a Labour Government which was one of the most authoritarian in recent history.
To find the antecedents of 28 day pre-charge detention requires going back to the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings of 1974. The first Prevention of Terrorism Act was introduced following the Birmingham pub bombings. Described by then Home Secretary Roy Jenkins as "draconian" this piece of legislation brought in seven day pre-charge detention. One of the first people detained under its provision was Paul Hill of the Guildford Four, so it had a good record for entrapping the innocent from the off.
It was subsequently used over the years to detain hundreds of thousands of people at the ports, airports and beyond. The detention period could be anything from an hour to seven days. Some 86 per cent of people were released without charge. The way in which the PTA was used effectively made a suspect community of the Irish. It also had the effect of stopping people getting overtly involved in the politics of the North.
The PTA came up for renewal each year. In the early 1980s the Labour Party changed to opposing the renewal, only to later abstain when Tony Blair took over as shadow home secretary in the early 1990s.
The next major change for pre-charge detention came in 2000 with the passing into law of the Terrorism Act. At a time of unprecedented peace, pre-charge detention was extended to 14 days. The timing of this move coming as it just as the peace process was underway in the North and 9/11 had yet to happen, proved to many that anti-terror law had little to do with preventing terrorism and everything to do with cutting back on human rights.
After 9/11, the government made an even more audacious grab for liberties bringing in the Anti-terror crime and security act which allowed for the indefinite detention of foreign nationals if they were felt to pose a threat to national security and could not be deported.
In 2004, the law lords ruled this legislation to be unlawful, resulting in proposals to bring in control orders and 90 day pre-charge detention.
A mighty battle raged over the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act resulting in the creation of the control order regime and agreement to 28 day pre-charge detention. The Blair government was defeated over 90 day pre-charge detention. There was a further attempt to up pre-charge detention in October 2008 under Prime Minister Gordon Brown failed due to a combination of opposition and the overwhelming effect of the financial crisis.
Human rights organisation Liberty point out that no one has been held for longer than 14 days since October 2008.
Liberty also point out that Britain has the highest level of pre-charge detention in the western world, with the US and Spain having two days, Italy four days and Spain five days. "Six months in Whitehall passes a lot quicker than 28 days in a police cell without knowing why. The Coalition has bound itself together with the language of civil liberties. Now it must reduce the longest pre-charge detention period of any western democracy," said Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty.
How the Coalition government deals with the issue of control orders will be another test of its mettle on civil liberties. The Conservatives and Liberal Democrats both opposed them in opposition. Then Liberal Democrat Home Affairs spokesman described control orders as “pure kafka” and “an affront to British justice.”
Liberty describe control orders as allowing “suspects to be indefinitely tagged, confined to their homes and banned from communicating with others without police interview, charge or trial.
“The effect of this legislation is that some people have been subject to detention and community punishment for over seven years on the basis of the Home Secretary’s suspicions and secret evidence which the suspect will never see.”
Concerns over backtracking by the new administration have surfaced with the revelation that two new control orders have been imposed on the Pakistani students Abid Naseer and Ahmed Faraz Khan. These two men won their appeal against being deported to Pakistan after no charges were brought against them relating to an alleged terror plot. Though the appeal was won the adjudicating body the Special Immigration Appeals Commission effectively branded them terrorists.
Three other control orders have been renewed bringing the total in force to 12. It will be interesting once the review is complete to see if control orders are banned and the paraphanalia of secret evidence the surrounds their imposition outlawed. Liberty are also submitting to the review that phone tap evidence should be admissible in court so making it easier to bring cases to court. The Coalition Government’s review offers hope of a rolling back of the anti-terror legislation and a restoration of liberty. However, a more cynical individual might suggest many of the most pernicious elements of these laws like control orders and 28 day pre-charge detention will simply be repackaged under new names or made “more accountable.” It would certainly be a rare thing to see a government giving back real liberty, after so many others having chipped away at this edifice for so long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
