Carillion: Public Risk, Private Profit By Kelly Grehan

So Carillion has gone into liquidation, plunging the lives of the 20,000 people working for them in the UK and those reliant on the public services they are paid by the coffers supplied by taxpayers to provide, into uncertainty.

Carillion is one of largest providers of NHS facilities management, covering:

200 operating theatres;

-300 critical-care beds and

-11,500 in-patient beds.

It also has contracts to maintain:

-50,000 armed forces’ houses;

– £680m contract to provide 130 new buildings in Aldershot and Salisbury plain for troops returning from Germany;

– It provides cleaning and school meals for 875 schools and

– Maintains 50% of prisons.

When governments began outsourcing the work for public services we were told it was a means  of transferring the risks arising from major projects to the private sector.

Of course this has proven to be categorically untrue.  

Outsourcing and privatisation doesn’t transfer risk to a company. Instead, it transfers any profits or savings made (coming from general taxation)  to shareholders and leaves taxpayers exposed and vulnerable towards all the risks and failures; because if they fail the government bails them out.

Privatisation simply means no accountability for public money

For over a year now, Carillion has been in meltdown. Its shares have dropped 90% and it issued profit warnings, and went through three chief executive within six months  Yet they continued to be awarded government contracts including the £1.4 billion HS2 contact.

Could the reason Carillion have continued to be given government contracts have anything to do with their Chairman, Phillip Green being a Tory Party donor?

Of course, while Carillion workers are likely to face a difficult time with regards to their future, no such worries exist for those who headed up the company.

Carillion’s pay policy wording was changed to make it harder for investors to claw back bonuses in the event of ‘corporate failure.’

Chief operating officer Richard Howson has made £1.9m in cash and share bonuses during his tenure while ex-finance chief Richard Adam has received £2.6m.

Shadow Business Secretary Rebecca Long-Bailey has already said contracts run by Carillion should be bought back ‘in-house.’

Rehana Azam, the National Secretary of the GMB Union, said: “The fact such a massive government contractor like Carillion has been allowed to go into administration shows the complete failure of a system that has put our public services in the grip of shady profit-making contractors.’

So what will happen next? Is this the beginning of the end of the privatisation of public services?

We are told that MPs will be holding an enquiry into outsourcing Public Sector jobs in the wake of the Carillion collapse.

Jeremy Corbyn echoes once again what most of us are thinking and hoping for. He has said that this ” Is a watershed moment for PFI contracts”.

One can hope.

What they will ‘find’ and act upon remains to be seen and many will feel that this is just the current government making another empty promise in a long and sorry saga of public services outsourced for private profit.

Isn’t It Time We Made Homes Fit For Human Habitation? By Kelly Grehan and Lisa Mulholland

The second reading of Karen Buck MP’s Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation and Liability for Housing Standards) Bill is on January 19th 2018.

We can hardly believe that, in the 6th richest country in the world, in 2018 it is necessary for such a bill to be raised.  

It is astonishing that such a protection is not already in existence for tenants. Tenants have no avenue for redress or means of compelling landlords to make repairs or even secure the safety of the property.

The Bill would empower tenants by giving them the right to take their landlord to court if they fail to take action to resolve a problem.

There are currently around one million rented homes with hazards that pose a serious risk to health and safety. This affects over 2.5 million people.

You might think that this lapse in the law is an oversight that just needs to be rectified. But you would be mistaken.

A version of the Bill was first introduced by Karen Buck in 2015 and was ‘talked out’. A version of the Bill was also proposed as an amendment to the Housing and Planning Act 2016 and was voted down by the government. Including the 87 Tory MPs who are landlords.  Their argument was that such legislation would burden upon landlords and discourage people from renting out homes.

How did we get in the situation we are in today, one might ask.

Many years of under funding and de regulation of the housing market we could argue.

What could be a greater burden for any person than trying to live in a ‘home’ unfit for human habitation, you might wonder.

Data from the English Housing Survey 2017 found that Almost a third (29 per cent) of homes rented from private landlords fail to meet the national Decent Homes Standard; meaning they either contain safety hazards or do not have acceptable kitchen and bathroom facilities or adequate heating

Poor housing impacts on children by making them 25% more at risk of ill health or disability, including raised risk of meningitis or asthma and a greater chance of mental health issues.

They are also more likely to miss school through illness.  Almost one million privately rented homes are deemed to be in a state of “substantial disrepair”, while 442,000 have damp in one of more rooms.

Poor housing also places a greater burden on other services and affects society as a whole, not just children.

Substantially more working age adults living in bad housing report fair, bad or very bad general health (26%) than those living in good housing (17%), with adults in bad housing 26% more likely to report low mental health compared with those living in good housing.

Those living in bad housing are almost twice as likely to have their sleep disturbed by respiratory problems at least once a month.

The association between living in bad housing and health problems is particularly acute among those above retirement age; with Pensioners in bad housing a third more likely to have fair, bad or very bad health compared with those in good housing (58% vs 38%).

Almost a fifth (19%) suffer from low mental health compared with 11% in good housing.

Almost twice as many pensioners living in bad housing suffer from wheezing in the absence of a cold, compared with those in good housing.

Not only is this unacceptable and immoral in this day and age but it also undoubtedly places more burden on the cash strapped NHS, including mental health services and schools that are already under so much pressure.

So what can we do about this?

We welcome the second reading of the bill and hope that this can proceed to the next stage. MPs will have a vote on this issue and we the people can apply pressure on our local MPs to vote the right way.

You can find who your local MP is and and how to contact them by clicking on the link below.

http://www.ukpolitical.info/YouandyourMP.htm

The above is taken from Natcen’s 2013 report on People in bad housing.

Has Young Voter Apathy Finally Been Defeated by Jeremy Corbyn? By Sarinder Joshua Duroch

The Labour party has managed to secure well over 500,000 members since Jeremy has been the leader of the party.

“Bland”

“Not appealing”

“Doesn’t look the part”

“He is past it now ”

These were the cries we heard from many people both in the Labour party and from the opposition with their supporters mocking the man. They have all been proven wrong and have been made to hide their faces since Jeremy’s efforts in the last election and the subsequent results which forced the government to turn to the DUP; sorry state of affairs is it not, one may ask?

The Cri de Coeur of criticism for Jeremy can now be heard from the Tories and others who clearly judged a very good book by its cover. It’s like your very own boomerang coming back and smacking you between the eyes whilst you are trying to impress a crowd with ego and prowess.

Now Jeremy is the bestseller and the others who were clearly in a perceived first-class seat can’t even get standing space on a replacement bus service.

The falling Tory membership is a clear indication of the present state that they are in and internal critics have had to bow and confess that they were wrong about Jeremy.

So, has he managed to tackle voter apathy? One may ask with eager expectation for an optimistic answer.

There is no doubt that in my mind the Blair years had a lot to do with people just giving up on politics, socialism is what they wanted; spin and the ‘Red Tory’ is what they got according to many opinions on the street.

Did they just hide and not come out to vote, or was it the MP expenses scandal that had a lot to do with the creation of voter apathy?

Younger people historically have never really shown much desire to engage in the political sphere and inner domains of politics; this is changing since Jeremy has become the leader.

Momentum is proving to be very information technology astute, a day doesn’t go by where I do not receive something in my inbox from Momentum HQ or from my local branch via Facebook interaction.

Has this new army of Jeremy Corbyn’s faithful foot soldiers eventually taken over a town called Apathy that was considering changing its name to a town called Malice seeing how fed up people had become of politics?

One can only hope so because of the danger surrounding the embryonic stages of voter apathy growing into voter stagnation.

We truly cannot allow a doubtful or fearful denouement of any election based on low turnout figures.

Obviously, we are not like other nations that require you to vote otherwise fines or imprisonment can be imposed, are we truly reliant on the personality cult to get us out and vote?  

Sadly, the consequences of this has been proven in the 2014 European Parliamentary elections where UKIP relied solely on the personality cult of Nigel Farage and it worked for them, the turnout in the 2014 European Parliamentary election was only 35.6%, whereas in Belgium it was 89.4%.

Is it any surprise that populism won the day and managed to access the open safe for the European Parliament’s salaries, expenses and chauffer driven Mercedes cars for UKIP MEPs?

I am sure Jeremy has learned that voter apathy turns into voter stagnation that in turn creates a recruitment ground for populists and the far right.

The working classes tend to contribute to voter apathy, but when they want to vote in protest it can be a very angry response to the climate of the day.

Where does Jeremy come into this? His members loved him, but an element of his own MPs were not so sure, he stood his ground and brought in an original brand of socialism that totally confused the faithful. No wonder considering the amount of ‘Blair & Campbell intoxication’ found in their blood streams when their levels were checked for spin exposure!

Where does the young vote come into this?

Well, it is blatant that Jeremy may have just overturned voter apathy in our nation. The last election was a total success for voter turnout in relation to the young vote.

For the first time in 25 years the figures hit a high note at 64% for voters aged between 18-24, in 2005 only 7% of voters in this age range came out to vote.

Was it a wake-up call?

Where were these young voters in earlier years?

Is it the case that the British Brexit Referendum result has created a new wall of defence against populism and the rise of the far right with young voters appearing at the ballot box?

With the rapid decline of first time buyers in the nation and the voter behavioural pattern of those in social housing always voting Labour; it is now apparent that the housing crisis may have given Labour the advantage at the ballot box in the 2017 General Election.

Private renters in the last election voted 54% for Labour and 34% for the Conservatives. Jeremy must be doing something right, that is a massive change from the 2010 election where 35% voted Conservative and 29% voted Labour.

Traditionally homeowners have a greater turnout but in 2017 private tenants had the greatest impact where the increase was 8% in turnout to 53% with most voting Labour.

In addition to this the suffering is continuing and the private tenants, mostly young people, are struggling to pay the rent each month. 33% of 25-34-year olds are having difficulties in meeting payments, this is out of a total of 1.3 million enduring difficulties in paying the rent.

Home ownership has been a tradition in the UK, unlike in the EU where renting has been the traditional option. Therefore, there is always living hope in equity; this isn’t happening any longer and young people are clearly turning to Labour to sort this crisis out.

So, what makes them turn to Labour, is it just policy or the clearly visible, plausible nature of Jeremy?

I am going to say it is the plausible socialist nature of Jeremy but what makes me say this? Jeremy made it clear that he doesn’t want to make Question Time a theatre but entails substance with questions that mean something to ordinary people.

He made it clear that he will be ‘resolutely political’ in the way he conducts himself in Parliament, in addition to this he has made it clear that “Political parties had written off young people, but young people didn’t write off politics.”

His view is that young people must be heard, the Momentum movement clearly has managed to encourage young people to engage and play an active role.

The membership of Momentum is just over 30,000 at present and is increasing. This is an indicator that participation at grassroot level is visibly evident in the formation of the many having a say and no longer the few making decisions on their behalf; Jeremy’s mantra chant is being placed in to action “For the many not the few”.

The attraction for young people is the digital technologies that Momentum has embraced, there are other activities such as political debates and greater interaction with the local branch where socialising and integrating where voices can be heard and acted upon are encouraged.

This movement is clearly a different way of doing politics and is not exposed to the traditional hierarchy structure of the local branches. People have been given roles with full trust to do so whereas, in the past these roles were designated to inner circles and paid staff.

Young people love the informality of Momentum and most of all it is grassroots, for once grassroots has been made to matter and this is where I believe young people have accepted and invested their trust in Jeremy Corbyn.

No young person seems to be a number but a force for change at grassroots level and an active participant with tons of interaction with technologies, in addition having the chance to vote for internal decisions.

The option to have information readily and quickly available is also another attraction like the ‘My nearest marginal’ site that gives activists knowledge on how to mobilise resources both human and practical in the event of an election including by-elections.

Momentum has clearly played a role in the rise of young participation in the electoral process.

However, there are factors like housing and poverty that are clearly linked to the higher participation of turnout and participation.

There is no doubt that Jeremy has managed to embrace the mindset of the young voter, how many past and present politicians can make that claim holding their head up high?

The answer is not many, that is a fact.

Sources: Ipsos Mori, Shelter & BBC Newsbeat.

Are the Tory Walls About to Come Tumbling Down? By Sarinder Joshua Duroch

What’s really changed since 1985?

It’s April 1985, the privatisation ethos is in full swing. Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are facing the full wrath of Tory policies, individualism and the tyranny of the ‘I’m alright Jack attitude’ sent from the Tory south east of England has increased the gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’…

I am now 44 years of age and it is fair to say I’ve seen the impact of Tory policies and unfairness, the memory of the violence that was displayed by the Police on behalf of the Tories to the miners and their families was totally abhorrent.

In fact, the news I was watching should have had a British Board of Film Classification certificate.

I will never forget the Police waving £20 notes at striking miners showing off their overtime pay, and shouting “thank you Arthur Scargill”.

Many were sent from the south east of England to the northern counties, Orwell was right when he said, ‘If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.’ That boot certainly was faced by anyone who had a socialist bone in their body. As for the cities, the skinheads were booting people around with limited intervention from the Police.

The teachers strike was in full swing at the time. How could I forget, I would turn up to classes and got sent away, we would wander around the streets of Glasgow and be fearful if the then Strathclyde Police would give us a hiding for being truant from school.

Don’t forget for a moment I was subjected to a fear of the police and them using force due to what happened to the miners.

Even at that age we were told that the Police are pro Queen, pro Protestant and certainly pro Tory; what chance did a young Celtic supporter have if he was stopped and questioned?

Well, we move on to 2017, what chance has any youngster got when this generation is still being used as free labour? Back then it was the slave labour of the YTS (Youth Training Scheme) and today we have people being sent on work trials by the job centre and they work for nothing or their benefits are stopped.

Has much changed under Tory rule?

NO!

Not much has changed at all, we lived in the fear of the far right then and had to be subjected to hate crimes that were laughed at by the authorities and the Police, in comparison today it is not an exaggeration to say that it was a totally different world.

Hate crimes have increased but they are treated with urgency now not like in the past where if you took a hiding for being who you are then it was your fault according to the authorities.

One movement did make a difference to the socialist mindset and strengthened the will of many young people, it was the famous school children’s strike of April 1985.

10,000 school children took part in a strike against the Tory’s YTS scheme. Rightfully so given that they were expected to complete their schooling and be oppressed by the employer; who was probably enjoying the delights of the Chamber of Commerce meetings in smoke and alcohol filled rooms down in the golf club or some country club whilst the working classes could hardly afford a pint down in the Working Men’s Clubs of Liverpool.

The whole thing was designed to ensure that the children of those union members would become reliant on the wages of torture whilst business leaders profited from their misfortune of being working class children.

Well, the Tories had something else coming and that was the will of these young heroes who refused to be broken by the state and its attempt to supress the youth into submission, and make them subservient just like those in the colonies who joined the police and carried out the agenda of the masters.

Do not be disillusioned by the exploitation of cheap labour abroad by these corporations where there are little or no employment laws.

India is a prime example with the violations of child labour and the call centres that are in place to serve these corporations based over here. So, it is the same ethos of brutal corporate colonialism and appeased to by the subservient servants who are serving the cause and continuing the suffering of their own people.

Those kids in the city of Liverpool were striking for their future and without any arms apart from their school bags and uniforms off they went to the banks of the Mersey to show the government that their will cannot be broken.

In a time when there was no social media all they relied on was leaflets and word of mouth. They still managed to generate 10,000 kids, all achieved in a city where poverty was rampant because of the unfair policies aimed at the working classes.

The south east overall was relishing in the waves of new cash that was being made available by the sell off from public owned industries and the cash being generated from the boom that was created for the Tory voters in the south east.

As for the northern cities, their kids were taking up the cause of fighting for their justice and future opportunities there were no wages for their efforts only the hope of a better future.

When was the last time holding your ground for principle and morals paid you? The wages of sin only go to the sinful.

The odious Norman Tebbit who was the Education Secretary at the time made it clear that all benefits for 16 & 17 years olds will be stopped if they do not go into further education or if they fail to find work; they were forced to engage with the infamous YTS scheme.

Has much changed in 2017?

Today we have the increase in the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’, corporations are booming from tax incentives and loop holes in the system where taxation can be avoided legally.

Yet we have people being sent to work on work trials for free and then sent back to the job centre to be humiliated for not securing employment!

We need the spirit of the school children who went on strike in 1985.

The will has not been totally broken to stand up for the change in government. I do believe we need to take on Orwell’s words and stand by them by not being afraid of political correctness that in result creates appeasement that silences our principles.

George Orwell ~

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, impostersthieves and traitors are not victims but accomplices”

Do we want to become the accomplices, or do we want to be like the kids of 1985 who were petrified of being suspended, or even arrested by the Police on some breach of the peace act or public disorder act being in place.

Don’t forget, now you can simply Google everything, back in 1985 you needed to learn your rights and know them well because it was deemed that you had no rights if you were northern, working class and the son or daughter of a socialist.

To remind the youth of today, I must express this example of what the Tories and their antics are really like.

We must agree that we are a charitable nation, are we not?

Yes of course we are.

I grew up at a time when the famine in Ethiopia was killing the whole nation, Bob Geldof and Midge Ure started the Live Aid campaign and it certainly showed the world that we are a charitable nation of substance.

Our working classes did what they could to raise money for the Live Aid cause and showed their charitable nature.

There is no doubt those who watched the scenes on the news were moved to the point where it left a psychological scar on the mind.

Watching children die in their parents’ arms and be subject to the torment of starvation really moved this nation.

It didn’t move the Tories or Thatcher though did it!

I will never forget her being collared by Bob Geldof because she refused to exempt the Band Aid record, ‘Do they know it’s Christmas’ from 15% VAT.

So here we have the working classes raising money for the cause to save the lives of starving children and doing something for humanity, whilst they themselves were still nursing the wounds of police batons from the miners’ strike.

Thatcher with a deluge of support from the Tories would refuse to exempt the record of VAT and return any tax made from the record to the starving children of Ethiopia.

A Labour MP at the time held Thatcher to account and asked her to refund the 15% tax. MP Al Morris of Manchester, Wythenshawe said:

“Every penny of this money was intended for starving children in Africa, and not for the Billy Bunters of the Treasury. You cannot praise the Good Samaritan and then mug him to the tune of 15% of his aid.”

“I want Mrs Thatcher to instruct the Treasury to find a way to refund their pickings from this wonderful event -which may run into many thousands of pounds.”

MP Morris became the first Minister for the Disabled in 1974 and his work played a huge role in passing legislation in 1970 for disabilities and chronic illnesses.

I wonder what he would have to say about the Tories and their antics with PIP and the indignation that disabled people must go through today.

So, what has changed since 1985?

Years later, in November 2014, George Osborne eventually surrendered to the idea of VAT exemption and informed Geldof he can keep the money for the Ebola cause.

Did he want to appease the working classes by making this decision or was he just as moved as his loyal tears for Margaret Thatcher at her funeral?

They say in politics that one must vote and speak with their conscience, so didn’t one Tory MP have the courage to stand up and hold the hierarchy of the Tory party to account?

At least in the Labour party Blair felt the wrath from Robin Cook over the Gulf war and had his own MPs holding their ground.

The Tories were and still are petrified of their leadership, any sign of change will be for their own financial gain or a power grab; not for the principles of humanity, that you can forget right this very instant.

So, what has really changed?

We still have massive profits being made by companies that bought our industries!

We still have cheap or total free labour.

The human trafficking situation is way out of control because profits before people is still the main concern of the Tory government.

People cannot make it to the end of the month financially, food and fuel poverty is a massive problem and zero hours contracts have been allowed to flourish without much opposition or questioning from the Tories.

We have had a recent increase in rail fares and buses are no longer the cheaper option for the working classes.

The 1985 deregulation act of our buses was implemented in October 1986, Labour Lords managed to create an amendment that prevented PM May from prohibiting local authorities from running a bus service back in 2016.

Labour made it clear that municipalisation must remain an open option to local authorities, thus allowing the opportunity of public ownership returning to the people who were victims of corporate theft by the Tory government.

Bus fares have risen faster than inflation and bus usage has fallen by more than a third causing more congestion on our roads.

So again what has changed since 1985?

It’s the same corporate tyranny supported by the Tory government, someone is certainly getting richer from all of this and it isn’t the people who are paying for all, that is a certainty.

Consumers must accept it or just simply must walk to their destination; the market is like a hostile takeover where three bus companies hold the monopoly they are Arriva, Stagecoach and First Bus.

The Tories have totally ensured that the working class pay for this proper, since 1995 to 2016 bus fares outside of London rose by 156% whilst the Retail Price Index rose by 77%.

What has changed since then?

This month saw another rail fare increase for the same quality service where delays, cancellations and not getting a seat is a daily occurrence.

As for the Tory faithful; the membership I am referring to, that is falling according to media sources and activists the figure could be under 100,000 members.

Is it the case that the autocratic ethos of the Tories has finally broken the will and participation enthusiasm when only 28% of them have a say on policy formation?

Could it be that many Conservative members have been mislead and when they visit their doctor’s surgery or local hospital the reality hits them straight in the face?

Maybe the reality of life hits them when they need to access the NHS or face unemployment.

Whatever the reason, brick by brick, this wall is tumbling down.

The next repetition we will be seeing is more seats like Canterbury becoming Labour; Canterbury was a massive victory and with Jeremy’s leadership more towns and cities will become Labour.

Whatever he is doing it is working and working exceedingly well the membership reflects that at over 500,000.

I will leave you with the lyrics of the 1985 song Walls Come Tumbling Down by the Style Council, it may just rekindle your desire for change of government and not stand for this social oppression.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5HfOipwvts

You don’t have to take this crap

You don’t have to sit back and relax

I know we’ve always been taught to rely

Upon those in authority

But you never know until you try

How things just might be

Are you gonna try to make this work

Or spend your days down in the dirt

You see things can change

Yes, and walls can come tumblin’ down

Lights go out

Walls come tumblin’ down

Yes, they do

Yes, they do

The competition is a colour TV

We’re on still pause with the video machine

Until the unity is threatened by

Those who have and who have not

Those who are with

And those who are without

And dangle jobs

Like a donkey’s carrot

Are you gonna

Get to realise

The class war’s real

And not mythologised

And like Jericho

Yes, and walls can

Come tumblin’ down

Lights go out

Walls come tumblin’

They’ll be too weak

To fight it

Oh, the world’s united

Oh, we’ll unite it

Are you gonna

Be threatened by

The public enemy

Number 10

Those who play

The power game

They take the profits

You take the blame

Are you gonna try

To make this work

Or spend your days

Down in the dirt

You see things can change

Walls can come

Tumblin’ down

Oh, lights go out

Walls come tumblin’ down

Yes, they do

Lights go out

Walls come tumblin’ down

Oh, lights go out

Walls come tumblin’ down

Oh, lights go out

Walls come tumblin’ down

Source BBC Politics, Daniel Zeichner Labour MP for Cambridge.

Educational Attainment and the British Indian Sub-Continent Origin Vote By Sarinder Joshua

They say be careful about what you wish for, are British Indians entering a cauldron of ingredients full of division and hate?

For the many not the few, this is Jeremy’s equality mantra and given the last election result it has become evident that this is clearly resonating with the British public.

There is another issue of concern relating to what we would classify as for the many and not the few.

I am referring to the education opportunities in the nation and who are becoming the beneficiaries of the divisions that have been placed in our society since the Tories have been in power and their attempt at the ‘Big Society’.

It is evident from the statistics that the white working-class males are not excelling in education and they have become sound recruits for the populist mantra and the far right.

Are we supposed to believe that this is all the ‘fault of the foreigner within our midst’?

Is it the case that we must surrender to the belief that the ‘white British are lazy at work and educational engagement’ and leave it at that conclusion?

No! I disagree with these socially disruptive and falsehood statements that are brandished around like hearsay that is providing entertainment whilst there is a power cut for hours and people make up folklore to pass the time of day until the light returns.

The facts do reflect that the white working classes are falling behind in education, the highest performers are Indian & Chinese origin children in our schools.

One can agree that the investment in education within these cultures is of paramount importance.

We need to understand why this is the situation, I am of Indian origin, third generation, and I have my own perception of why this is the case.

Firstly, the white working classes have traditionally been directed towards apprenticeships and other trades.

This is no longer available in abundance and there is no doubt that the white working classes have suffered terribly from the demise of the extended family ethos and communities have been broken by the selfishness and self-centred ethos implementation of the Thatcher years that were continued by subsequent Tory governments.

The white working classes were ignored on an industrial scale once they were subjected to buying their council homes and generating money for the economy in the eighties. Did they ever recover from that Thatcher initiative?

I always believed this was to place the working classes in debt by having mortgages, so they would think twice about striking and rebelling against an employer.

On the other hand, we can look at first generation Indian sub-Continent immigration and ask ourselves why were they ignored and not subjected to integration and better race relations.

Why suddenly are third and fourth generation Indian sub-Continent origin British nationals being embraced by the Tories? The answer is simple, the Tory Conservative mindset that promotes business, family and traditional values resonates with the British Indian community.

However, their parents always voted Labour as a safety net due to the threat of being thrown out of the U.K.

We can’t ignore the Birmingham speech by Enoch Powell most popularly known as the Rivers of Blood speech and that many Indian origin immigrants were expelled from Uganda by Idi Amin. Once these immigrants, of which many were British nationals in the first place settled into Leicester and implemented their business acumen, they became of interest. Prior to their arrival they were encouraged not to come to the U.K and were met with anger in many cases.

Naturally the first generation would have been petrified about their status in this nation and saw the socialist outlook of Labour to be a safer vote and most of all a secure move to make; resting assured that they would not be thrown out of this nation.

Education is essential to people of Indian origin, there are cultural traits that dictate excellent results in education. For a lot of parents their pension policy is their children and the oldest son is expected to look after his parents in old age, one can only do this if the financial resources are available to do so.

The other issue that is of a major concern is the status symbol of education and caste, we know the Indian caste system is an abhorrent system of dehumanisation and it has found its way into this society without being questioned or opposed by all political domains in the early days of Indian sub-Continent immigration.

The exception to this is Jeremy Corbyn who has publicly opposed the caste system and has not been afraid of the multicultural appeasement agenda in doing so.

For many who immigrated here in the early years of the fifties and sixties it was to their amazement that they could even sit on a chair and do their work in a classroom whereas, in India if one was from a scheduled caste or regarded as an untouchable one would be humiliated and made to sit on the floor of the class whilst the higher castes were given preferential treatment by being given chairs and desks.

This gave many the hope that education should be embraced and most of all the opportunity; is it any surprise most of them have done well in the fields of education and employment by having an opportunity that does not dehumanise them.

I am convinced that the white working classes have been left behind by the Tories so that apathy is developed into voter stagnation and they rebel against Labour and choose the populist vote.

As for the Indian origin third and fourth generations they have been subjected to corporate appeasement rather than multicultural appeasement by the Tories. Did they care about them as first-generation immigrants?

Now that India is doing well in an economic sense we are seeing the Tories embracing the third and fourth generations, David Cameron’s warm up act at Wembley Stadium when PM Modi arrived here was a classic example. Even though many see his government as a theocratic lead government the Tories still are ignoring the concerns and pushing the division agenda. He went as far as speaking Hindi on stage and making the statement that there will be an Indian origin Prime Minister in Downing Street one day, if there will be a Tory PM it will certainly be one that is moulded into the expectation of the Tory prototype.

The divisions are evident, we are seeing a shift in ethnic minority voting patterns.

In the 2015 election we saw 1.6 million ethnic minority voters support Labour and for the first time the Conservatives managed to get 1 million ethnic minority voters.

However, the area of concern is the origin of the voters and the divisions that are being created. Muslims and Christian ethnic minorities are still voting for Labour and the Tories know this very well indeed.

Historically there have been divisions between these communities, the partition of India and Pakistan is evidence of this but what are we seeing now in the U.K, have we moved to a new category in the class divide?

Is it now evident that minorities within minorities will become categorised by a new class hierarchy structure that is only applicable to ethnic minorities in this nation?

The Conservatives have clearly managed to convince the professional British Indian community to vote for them and thus create a new class in society.

In my youth, people of Asian origin would only really stay in cities and in their city suburbs at the most, now we are seeing third and fourth generation people moving into the areas that are Conservative and rural. To fit in and get the best employment opportunities and display their educational prowess they are certainly managing to change their voting intention and social integration; falling straight into the hands of the Conservative plot to create a new division in society.

It is evident from the research that the Conservatives are focusing on the Hindu vote, 41% voted Conservative and 49% Labour. Muslim voters were very different in their behavioural pattern, 64% Labour and 25% Conservative.

Whilst the Tories are placing political expediency before equality the gulf between British Indian, Chinese and white British within education is increasing rapidly.

Students with five or more GCSEs at A*- C grade or equivalent in 2014-15 was immense in difference.

Chinese origin students reached 86.8%, Indian origin students reached 80.8%, white British 65.9%, Pakistani origin 62.4% and Black Caribbean reached 58.1%.

Obviously, we know that fuel poverty and food poverty have increased immensely over the years so when one looks at the same figures for those who are in receipt of free school meals there is a bigger gulf of a difference.

Chinese origin girls reached 80.6%, Chinese origin boys 67.6% Bangladeshi origin girls 59.6% and Indian origin girls 58.2%.

The national average is 57.1% for this category in receipt of free school meals, the figures plummet from the national average indicating that the groups that need the most help are clearly becoming victims of social exclusion due to the Tories and their desire not to have a cohesive and fair society.

Black Caribbean girls 40.9%, White British girls, 32.0%, Black Caribbean boys 24.4% and White British boys 24%.

If the Conservatives call these figures a success I would like to ask them what a failure looks like.

Some in the media have been critical of Jeremy Corbyn, highlighting that his opposition to the caste system and a greater vision for welfare reform will not resonate with the British Indian community.

My view is steadfast on these views that are being brandished around, we don’t need to appease to one social evil to keep the multicultural appeasement ethos happy!

Where there is an injustice we need to stand up against it in full force and hold our ground.

I will not tolerate appeasement to keep a segment of the British Indian or any other community happy, if a practice is not conducive to the laws and values of this land it has no place within it.

Jeremy Corbyn is working to prohibit this abhorrent system of caste discrimination in our nation.

It is evident that the Tories are willing to appease those who are supporters of this system to continue with their fast pace of recruitment and voter retention among the Hindu & Sikh communities.

There are many who still support caste based temples and see Jeremy Corbyn’s stance as an impingement to their culture or some would rightfully call it social apartheid.

Jeremy Corbyn has been on the case since 2012 to ensure that greater equality is displayed within the British Indian community by dealing with the issue of caste discrimination.

An equal society must be equal in all its components, where political expediency exploits differences for its own advantages it is a gross act of selfishness and indirect hate implantation; the Tories have already imposed this ethos to the white working classes.

Now it seems they are working their way into the British Indian community.

Do not forget, colonialism was not successful without those who wanted to benefit from the arrival of the menace on their shores.

Can we justifiably state that Priti Patel and others have the same ethos of the collaborator where they benefited from engaging and dancing to the tune of the Tories?

We do know that even UKIP became victims of the Tory plot, the Tories always wanted to control immigration but after Enoch Powell’s speech they were very careful how they tread on the terrain of immigration.

One could argue that UKIP played the tune that the Tories wanted to broadcast and hear but were not willing to speak the language that UKIP were using.

My perspective as a British Indian is not unique, I am free in this nation and I am a proud British citizen and a convert to the Christian Roman Catholic faith.

I am glad that I am free to choose my faith and be free to express my opinion, having the support of a new proper socialist leader who believes in the defence of his citizens against such inequalities be it economic, geographical or caste based discrimination is assuring and strengthens my identity as a British national of Indian origin.

I call those who disagree with Jeremy to come forward and argue with him over his stance against discrimination.

It is the next challenge that we face where a new division is being manufactured and supported, British Indians can argue that they are free to vote for who they want.

The issue here is, are they aware of the new class divide that is being created under the guise of practicing democracy by voting for the Tories or are they welcoming a new-found class that is only promoting division?

It has happened to the white working classes and created a massive surge in voting for populism and a recruitment ground for the far right.

Will British Indians sub consciously or deliberately make life harder for themselves if they become the victims of populism and the far right; will their ‘new’ Tory friends come to their rescue when there is hate breeding in society and they become the victims of their own desire to be part of the Tory elite?

Sources:

DFE,

University of Leicester,

The Economist November 2015

British Future.

The Tories And Their Idea Of The ‘Big Society’ By Sarinder Joshua Duroch

The ‘Big Society’ speech was introduced in Liverpool in 2010 sadly, the outcome of the deception still echoes nationwide in 2017.

On the 19th July 2010, David Cameron made a speech in working class and historically socialist Liverpool outlining the benefits of the ‘Big Society’.

Many Liverpudlians can’t forget the devastation of the early eighties where the employment prospects and class divide under Thatcher elevated to heights never seen before. There were riots in Toxteth and the far right were running riot in the town with skinheads using violence as the main instrument of hate implementation.

The Police who were already carrying out the government’s desires by beating up strikers did nothing to create harmony between communities, there was little in the way of police community relations; let’s face it Thatcher wanted to punish northern communities for being pro unions, the police were always a sound resource to use to implement the agenda on the street.

That suited Thatcher very well indeed, she fooled everyone with the idea of buying their council homes and taking on mortgages, I am sure she spoke to herself in Downing Street in total joy by saying, ‘Oh well, once they have mortgages I will see how much they will strike then!’

The people of Liverpool must have really wondered what on Earth David Cameron was doing in their city, he wasn’t taking the biscuit; he was taking the packet on this occasion. Surely in Liverpool there was more chance of hell freezing over than the public applauding him and thanking him for his visit.  

David Cameron spoke about social action, public service reform and community empowerment. He encouraged people to come forward with ideas so that he could provide them with the tools to take their communities to the next step of ownership and ensure that the government wasn’t top down and allowed greater autonomy to the people.

It all sounded all so innovative on paper, but there were hidden agendas, he really wanted people to do all the work and at the same time looking to save money and not spending the government’s money.

He intended to finance all of this with dormant bank accounts and money that had been left by those who may have died or just totally forgotten about it.

Whatever it was, as long as it didn’t cost the Tories a penny.

This was clearly a political and financial move on the hand crafted Tory chessboard, the austerity and cuts to public services was always on the minds of the Tories and to mask the problem like the Venetian elite attending a high society ball all wearing masks to hide their antics.

He clearly wanted to evade the real problems and leave society to clean up the mess that was made in the eighties by Thatcher. We must accept that the horrendous tearing up of the social fabric by Thatcher and the Tories would take more than a generation or two to repair.

He spoke about voluntarism, philanthropy and social action; charming coming from a Tory in an economically hard hit socialist city such as Liverpool.

What has the legacy of the ‘Big Society left us with and what can the people of Liverpool take from this speech and the subsequent years of Tory rule?

Foodbanks have increased and so has homelessness, in the UK year on year homelessness has risen dramatically, in England 2010 there were 1768 people sleeping rough and by 2016 the figures reached 4134 (134%) increase. Westminster remains the local authority with the most homeless people at 260.

If we look at the impact of three northern cities one can see that over a six-year period homelessness grew rapidly in Manchester, in 2010 the city had 7 people sleeping rough and by the end of 2016 there were 78. (1014%) increase. Liverpool, where David Cameron made his ‘Big Society’ speech had growing sleeping rough figures, in 2010 there were 3 people sleeping rough and by the end of 2016 there were 21 (600%) increase. In Britain’s second city, Birmingham, in 2010 there were 9 people sleeping rough and by the end of 2016 there were 55 (511%) increase.

The perceived affluent home counties haven’t come out of this appearing in good health. If we take the town of Gravesham and the city of Canterbury, both located in Kent we will see the contrast in the negative ascend of homeless figures.

In 2010 the borough of Gravesham had 1 person sleeping rough and by the end of 2016 there were 12 people (1100%) increase. The city of Canterbury, a well-known town for tourists and academia, in 2010 there were 3 people sleeping rough and by the end of 2016 there were 50 (1567%) increase. In Croydon, south London, there has been a large increase in rough sleepers. In 2010 there were 4 rough sleepers and in 2016 there were 68 (1600%) increase. Finally, in Brighton & Hove in 2010 there were 14 rough sleepers and in 2016 there were 144 (928%) increase.

One can only imagine in a negative sense what the socio-economic costs of danger to health this causes during the winter months. In 2005 the National Audit Office reached the conclusion that homelessness costs £1 billion, this covered the expense of paying for accommodation, providing grants and welfare administration.

The impact of the cost relating to mental health is also a major factor, each homeless person can cost £4298 for NHS services. Mental health costs £2099 per person, criminal justice can cost up to £11991; it’s evident the socio-economic costs are immense. The costs of temporary accommodation in London during 2014/2015 reached £663 million.

What exactly did the then Prime Minister expect from the people of the nation, his conclusion to this failed exercise and idea was aired during a speech in 2017 at the launch of the Fore Trust where he admitted that legitimate criticisms could be made of the ‘Big Society’ agenda.

Trussell Trust Foodbanks in England, providing help with emergency supplies of food for three days, has risen from 40,898 people in 2009/2010 receiving help to a staggering 1,182,954 in 2016/2017 (2792%) increase.

This is what the Tory ‘Big Society’ has achieved since that famous speech back in 2010. The North West has the highest number of people in receipt of help from Foodbanks, a total of 174,489 to April 2017; that figure will only increase. In London the figure is 111,101.  

This shows the scale of the problem in both the north and south of England. Scotland has provided over 145,000 food parcels in 2016/17.

We must admit that if not for the charitable nature of the British people, there would certainly be deaths relating to this crisis.

Again, it is obvious that the government are happy for the public to donate because they are saving money and then they have the countenance to congratulate the people of the nation for being so considerate. This must be met with a fulmination at the ballot box at the next election.

David Cameron has now left for a new post looking at promoting transport links to promote trade with China, the fund he oversees is worth £750 million. However, the UK and China initiative is worth over £1 billion.

There we have it, a nation that is left with a society where children are hungry and cannot afford breakfast.

Children and their parents don’t know where to turn during school holidays to get food, and we have the legacy of the Tory ‘Big Society’ in tatters.

500,000 children go to school hungry every morning and can’t concentrate on their studies or engage in physical activities at school.

We have bright and able children ready to perform for the economy when they are older, yet we are left with a part broken society because there is a disadvantaged population within our towns and cities that cannot function due to hunger.

We are meant to be the world’s sixth largest economy and we have 8 million people living in food poverty according to the UN and in addition we have 870,000 children going to bed hungry in this nation.

There is one thing for sure, people who are hungry know when they are being fed lies and false promises that is perceived to be filling nutrition to their hungry eyes. Once digested it has no impact, just like the false promises of the cohesive ‘Big Society,’ In George Orwell’s words, ‘In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.’ Has the revolution begun for a fairer society in the context of education, employment, health and reducing the massive gap between the increasing haves and have nots in our society?

Given the last general election results it looks as if it has and is gaining momentum in many parts of the UK. The public have seen the deceit and are telling the truth in a revolutionary manner; the votes for Labour at the last election is evidence of that.

Sarinder Joshua Duroch

Labour & Momentum member.

Brexit – How UKIP Turned The Reasonable Debate Into A Poisonous Sagittate By Ex UKIP Adviser Sarinder Joshua Duroch

One can clearly be patriotic and hold no animosity to other minority groups in their own social or personal interaction domain.

However, looking deeper into why someone with an educated and socially aware background such as myself, would join a populist movement like UKIP is something that will always raise an eyebrow or question.

The answer is simple, one will approach an issue like Brexit or a fairer immigration policy with good intentions and not have a single apprehension about minority groups and still get caught up in the idiom ‘one is only judged by the company they keep’.

It is true that I excelled in UKIP and became an advisor for the cultural policy and then moving onto the European Parliament I became very involved in scrutinising the EU budget and highlighting the bureaucracy and the costs attached to it. Never was there an element within me that blamed minorities or wanted to pursue the hate campaign on behalf of UKIP or others.

Let’s look at what made me join and subsequently change my school of thought.

Due to my ability to be a powerful public speaker and belief in the ethos of the fairer immigration policy that UKIP was striving to achieve and boost the relationship with the Commonwealth, I became someone that clearly suited the agenda; the hidden agenda was always kept away from the British public and from me. I suppose I was too honest and believed in the message of the fairer immigration policy.

When I got to Brussels and met the other far right parties that were aligned with UKIP in the EFDD group to keep the funding stream ignited.

It became very apparent that UKIP had to change their tune to appease the far-right parties and produce materials that pushed a very anti-Islamic message and from the foot soldiers I saw a wave of anti-Jewish abuse on Tweets that were sent out; I felt very betrayed because each time I raised this issue it was never dealt with. I noticed the ethos that was brewing in relation to relishing from a crisis especially if it related to the refugee crisis.

The dehumanisation of refugees came into effect and for me that was  clearly not the patriotic British stance for me where it was being infiltrated by a nationalistic propaganda machine.

It is true to say that a reasonable argument relating to fairer immigration got corrupted and was allowed to become a race issue; that was not the intention, but it was a product that could be sold to the white working classes.

Thus, creating the uproar of the Enoch Powell speech and glorifying the differences between us and not promoting British cohesion through our patriotism.

This was not the reason why I joined the party and I would like to state that my parents, society and nation brought me up to be better than that.

I was brought up to see the colours of my flag and celebrate our great unity.

I was not brought up to judge people on the colour of their skin or dehumanise them based on their circumstances.

This is exactly what the populist agenda wanted me to do and I could not betray my nation and turn against people based on who they are.  I was watching my own MEPS and colleagues diluting ethnicity with nationality and that clearly was not acceptable for me, my family and nation.

In Brussels, the Belgians and others would engage in conversations with me to examine my views relating to this brand of British populism and they soon realised I was not on the same wavelength as the people I was working with.

It became evident that the white working classes were to be targeted by the far right of Sweden and others within the EFDD group.

I would watch people from the Swedish Democrats attend UKIP conferences and just couldn’t stand the message of hate they were distributing in my nation. UKIP and their partners would talk about how they did not want Britain to become like Sweden and target the white working classes by placing fear into their hearts and minds.

My own countrymen and countrywomen were being corrupted by the personality cult and were encouraged to open their mouths before their minds.

It is meant to be the other way around if one wants to have a sensible debate and analyse the truth. I had colleagues around me who were calling for the return of the British Empire on internet communications and I noticed a very colonial mind-set being implemented into the younger members of the staff base in Brussels. They were encouraged to meet with other people from the Swedish Democrats who already possessed very anti-Jewish and an anti-minorities outlook.

I was watching very intelligent young people becoming corrupted by hate and then idea was always to keep the far right happy, so they do not leave the group and then the EFDD group loses funding.

So, was this appeasement worth it?

The answer is NO!

Now they have been exposed in the press and they have employment prospects that will always have the hate label attached to them.  I always did state that the behaviour of UKIP will not get them seats in the British Parliament.

Will the British public thank UKIP for the Brexit vote by giving them enough votes to get them in Parliament?

Well, that was proven when Nigel Farage couldn’t even win a seat in his own country.

The Tories allowed them to make a mess of the immigration debate and snatched the victory making UKIP look totally inept.

The white working classes were not meant to be educated on the positives and negatives of Brexit.

The message was always immigration, immigration and more immigration.

Fear was placed in the hearts and minds of the white working classes always through social media and most of all the famous Breaking Point poster.

They used Christian Britain as their mantra, when I presented the case that Jesus Christ himself was a refugee they had no answer.

Obviously, I converted my faith and became a Christian, Roman Catholic back in 2010.

My theological education baffled them because according to them I was just another Asian that they had a stereotypical vision of; they were soon proven wrong because I was and still am a British patriot who does not allow hate to make me thought process distorted.

So, what was the agenda?

It is simple to comprehend. The populist movements simply acted as a conduit for the far right. Everybody on the far right loved them because they were doing all the work for them in a ‘very legal manner’. It came down to the ethics and morals for one to take a stance; I was the one who took the stance in the end.

It truly is worrying how much the white working classes were used, nothing was ever proposed to boost their literacy skills or employability prospects. Statistics were ignored relating to creating better labour market conditions for the white working classes and minority ethnic groups. They were simply there to pursue the message of hate and sadly, if that meant that they engaged in hate propaganda or even worse engage in racial violence that clearly suited the populist agenda.

The message became a laterigrade and so did policy, laterigrade to the point where the white working classes were watching the situation and didn’t realise that the hate machine was moving in a sideways manner like a crab.

The snapping claws were very near but by that time they personality cult had captured the trust of our countrymen, women and youth.

Once they were all captured in the claws of hate there was very little they could do apart from follow the message of hate and act as the couriers for the politicians who were clearly earning a sound amount of money and didn’t really care what happened to the white working classes.

However, they were the people’s army, they were labelled as the custodians of the revolution.

Did they get medals for their efforts?

Did they get a personal visit and a promise of a new job from UKIP and Nigel Farage?

No, they got nothing apart from the image we now have from foreign nations as being the instigators of hate. It is sad to see my nation’s people being used in such a manner; they are worth so much more than this.

Yes, it is acceptable to vote to leave the EU and it is acceptable for people to vote to remain.

I myself was a Brexit voter, but my intention was not to corrupt the argument but to see they equilibrium in its fairest form relating to EU immigration and non-EU immigration.

What changed?

Well it is obvious, focus on immigration of colour and you have the ticket to victory, that was the populist mindset of UKIP and their far-right friends. I became very aware of this and it was sickening to see how many of us were clearly fooled when we got to Brussels.

The cauldron of hate became so hot that it was like the scene out of Macbeth when the witches were adding venomous ingredients and sealing the fate for Macbeth. It became obvious by watching the pistons of the hate engine that ‘fair was foul, and foul was fair’.

I am glad I went to Brussels and saw for myself the true image of the party that always claimed that they were not racist.

Well, that soon came to an end when I was called an Untermensch (Nazi word meaning sub human and fit for extermination) by a Swedish Democrat and nobody did anything about it; all to save the lucrative funding.

Well, even your closest friends abandon you when you complain and stand up for your right to be recognised as a human and take a stance against hate.

Was it purely money or was it that my own party agreed with the statement?

A Belgian friend of mine told me that silence is cooperation.

I learned a lot from him, most Belgian and Swedish friends were in awe of me exposing the antics of UKIP. I did it for my country and I did not want to see my nation being dragged through the mud and then presented as a dry-cleaned garment.

My nation’s youth was being corrupted by hate and all they could see was the immigrant, the danger of this was the rise of hate.

Just picture the scene where I could have been attacked by some innocent youth who clearly saw me as the problem.

My Britishness would have been placed on the back burner and my colour would have been the only thing the potential attacker would have seen. Is this fair to do to a young person?

Destroying their employment prospects and creating revenge attacks out of something that enabled politicians to sit back and relish in joy.

That was the intention, let the white working classes do the dirty work for us, we will sit back and earn the Euros.

That was the mindset of the politicians who were pursuing this hate, as long as they got the political victory that is all that mattered to them.

My conclusion is simple. I encourage the nation to focus of on our success and not to dilute ethnicity with nationality. I hope one day we will all love Britain and Hate Racism; the question is how do we do it?

Well, it is not so difficult, do not allow the personality cult to overtake your lives and research everything. Pay attention to politics and become astute and equipped to vote with intellect and not allow oneself to become the fuel that lines the pockets of politicians and enables them to use and abuse you at the expense of your initial intention to love your nation and the people that make it great.

We can all hold disagreements but there is a way of presenting the argument for yourself, your nation and your immediate society. Create debate and healthy discussion and not hate to suit someone else’s agenda.

Be free and independent in thought and aim to build a Britain that is tolerant in thought but firm on reality.

Speak about immigration from a perspective of functionality and feasibility, people will listen to that and you will become more informed.

Spreading hate will only allow anger to breed anger; we will all be the losers and will lose sight of what we  want our nation to be; peaceful and engaging is the intention, not anger and hate.  

I am free now and I am no longer part of UKIP or any other populist party. I earned the wages of sin in Brussels and soon realised that this is not the way forward. On my return to the U.K I was hailed by many as a man of dignity and principle.

My children, who are fourth generation Great British citizens can pass the message onto the next generation and that is never to humiliate the nation and stand by our charitable and sensible nature rather than adhere to the politics of populism and hate.

Sarinder Joshua Duroch author of ‘Enoch, I am a British Indian’