Post Box
hmm honest gov
Paul Starling. Friday, March 17th, 2017.
Here is THE news which .... OUGHT .... to be the LEAD STORY In every NEWSPAPER, and TV and RADIO bulletin TODAY. (17. 03. 2017).
BRITAIN IN POLITICAL CHAOS. TORY GOVERNMENT CLOSE TO COLLAPSE. CABINET IN CRISIS MEETING.
'Theresa May is today expected to call a shock General Election over the 'election expenses' scandal.
The Prime Minister leads a 'Crisis' Cabinet Meeting at 10 Downing Street, and is expected to make an announcement at 10am.
A series of crises have confronted Mrs. May leading to deep splits in her Government.
The crucial issue, which could bring down the Government, is the scandal of undeclared expenses at the 2015 General Election.
Up to 40 Tory MPs may have secured their seats illegally police investigations may well show.
With a paper-thin majority of just 12 in the House of Commons, and serious splits in the Tory Party, it is expected that the Prime Minister will be forced to call a snap General Election.
The Government was rocked yesterday with a £70, 000 penalty by the Electoral Commission, it's biggest ever fine. The Commission found widespread 'irregularities' in the way the Conservative Party spent Central Party funds to get Tory MPs elected in several key, marginal, seats.
Police are investigating concerns that as many as three dozen or more Conservative MPs may have won their seats illegally.
Election rules place strict limits on spending of £15, 000 in each constituency to ensure no political Party is able to flood key constituencies with money beyond that £15, 000 limit to (effectively) 'buy seats'.
The allegations which have led to today's crisis Cabinet meeting, and serious splits in the Tory Party, is that the Conservative Central Office spent hundreds of thousands of pounds - from Central coffers - to bankroll an army of Party workers to bombard and win dozens of key constituency 'target' seats.
A number of Tory MPs have been interviewed under caution by various police forces.
Facing calls for election re-runs in perhaps 30-40 seats the Conservative Party's slim Commons majority of just 12 seats could be swept away.
The Prime Minister might have chosen to 'tough-it-out' today, but the uproar within the Tory Party over this issue has revealed deeper splits ... over the handling and issues of Brexit, Scottish 'independence' and the break-up of the Union, and drifts on policy with Theresa May being accused of weak leadership over her humiliating Budget U-turn, this week, on national insurance tax hikes for the self-employed.
Those splits will break out in to bitter recriminations at that crunch Cabinet meeting, and out in to open warfare in newspapers, tv and radio studios today.
Sources at the most senior level of Government briefed us about the "jockeying for position" of key cabinet figures.
The Prime Minister is expected to make an announcement to the country from Downing Street this morning.
If she chooses, or is forced, to call a snap election serious questions are being raised about whether Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is ready and capable of taking advantage of the Tory disarray .... and what sort of constitutional crises Britain will face over Brexit!'
Posted by jeffrey davies [86.17.83.77] on 17 March 2017
reply | edit & publish | delete
jeffs post
Labour HQ defunds Corbyn’s staff by half – he’s paying some himself
16/03/2017 · by SKWAWKBOX
‘Short money’ (named after the politician who instituted the system, Edward Short) is the name of the state funding to opposition parties to enable them to conduct the business of being an opposition.
As the largest party in opposition, Labour receives around £5.5 million in Short money for the current financial year – plus £789,000 specifically for the purpose of funding the office of the Labour leader.
In September last year, I sat through an excruciating session at Labour’s annual Conference, listening to the party’s treasurer patting herself and the platform on the back over the abundant condition of the party’s debt-free finances – ironically with no acknowledgement whatever of the fact that the party owes that state of affairs to the massive surge in the Corbyn-supporting membership, which now generates annual income for the party of £50 million.
The Labour Party is not ‘short’ of cash. So there is no excuse for what you’re about to read.
There have been rumours for some time that the Blairite-controlled Labour HQ is withholding resources from Jeremy Corbyn’s office, to such an extent that he is unable to pay for the usual complement of staff to run it.
Those rumours intensified when the release of Corbyn’s tax return showed that he is spending his own money to fund salaries for some of his staff.
Now, the SKWAWKBOX can disclose that those rumours are correct. A senior Labour source has confirmed to this blog that Corbyn’s office is being forced to run with only half the staff that Ed Miliband had.
It appears that the Labour right has little confidence that Corbyn’s leadership will fail on its own, properly and normally resourced, so they – and we are talking headquarters staff here, according to this blog’s source, not the NEC – are taking extremely direct action to try to make sure it fails.
This means a situation in which Labour ‘right-whingers’ who care only about their own position and careers and not in the least for the fact that the country desperately needs a real alternative to the Tories:
are relentlessly sniping at Corbyn and undermining him and his team to every ‘journalist’ who will listen over every assumed or manufactured mistake and
deliberately underfunding his office by half in order to have more ammunition
no mcnicol
The most senior Labour Party staffer is Iain McNicol. The senior Labour source lays the blame for this ridiculous situation squarely at his door.
McNicol and those aligned with him are deliberately setting up Labour to fail. They have betrayed the Party, its principles, its members and the tens of millions of people who need it – and they have no place near the Party, let alone running its HQ.
If you are a Labour member, make sure that your next branch/CLP meeting moves no-confidence in McNicol – and demands that Jeremy Corbyn’s staff is funded to at least the same level as the hapless Miliband’s was.
And that Corbyn – with no interference or limitation – chooses the personnel who will complete the team that he and his vision deserve.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 17 March 2017
====================
jeffs post
The May government is clinging to the life rafts today after three major scandals erupted at once. The electoral expenses scandal, the DWP ‘Kill Yourself’ scandal, and a budget that has been ripped apart by the right-wing press have created chaos in Downing Street. In a just world, any one of these should bring down the government.
Electoral expenses
The Canary was the first UK media outlet to gain the testimony of whistleblowers who lifted the lid on the election expenses scandal. Police are investigating 29 constituencies over hundreds of thousands of pounds of unreported campaign spending. There is evidence to suggest that the Conservatives may have overspent (in secret) on marginal seats, where just a few hundred votes were the difference between victory and defeat. Given the narrow majority of the Conservatives, if these seats are re-run – the government could fall with it. You can read The Canary’s previous reports here.
Channel 4 News have operated virtually alone in the established media on this story for over a year. Michael Crick and his team have traced the scandal all the way to Theresa May’s chief-of-staff Nick Timothy. And this week, the Electoral Commission has levied a record-breaking fine on the Conservative Party. The rest of the media – scenting blood – have now belatedly joined the attack.
The Conservatives are already considering their sacrificial lambs. But with Crick’s work establishing clear evidence of collaboration all the way to Downing Street, this could be turning into Britain’s Watergate moment.
The DWP ‘Kill Yourself’ scandal
As The Canary’s John Shafthauer writes:
On 28 February, The Canary reported the case of a woman who claimed an assessor working on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) asked her why she hadn’t killed herself yet.
Since we published that report, several people have approached us claiming the same thing happened to them. In this follow-up, we are publishing several of their testimonies. We have also spoken to Atos, the company which carries out assessments for the DWP. And in a separate report, we have discussed these claims with the President of the British Psychological Society, Peter Kinderman.
You can read the full testimonies here. And below is an example of what chronically sick and disabled people face in their DWP assessments:
I was at my ESA assessment in Poole, Dorset, summer 2016. I was suffering from suicidal depression and cluster headache (aka suicide headache). The interview was on the third floor. I opened the window to alleviate headache symptoms and he started making jump jokes and asking why I didn’t? In front of my social worker.
She wanted me to make a complaint but my mental health couldn’t take more conflict. I had gassed myself in a tent only 8 weeks previously.
And another:
I was asked if I’d thought about killing myself and then asked how I would do it. That was PIP. Have brain injury, constant anxiety attacks, and my meds for depression were increased today by doc. Didn’t score a single point. Nothing awarded. Have an ESA one to get through one week today. Absolutely dreading it.
Each testimony is the true story of a human being, hounded while at their most vulnerable. And by the very people who should be supporting them into care, treatment, or work.
The Catastrofuck Budget
Meanwhile, the May government’s first full budget has unravelled within a week, after it broke a manifesto pledge not to raise National Insurance contributions. Its allies in the right-wing media turned on the budget within hours, leaving the Chancellor no choice but to commit a string of embarrassing U-turns. This has left a more than £2bn hole in the government’s spending plans, with no clear path to close it. It has also left Hammond a laughing stock, derided across all shades of the political spectrum.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 16 March 2017
======================
jeffs post the gov above the law
A couple who defeated the government in court over the bedroom tax are being forced to appear before a judge again"
Natalie Bloomer By Natalie Bloomer
Tuesday, 14 March 2017 11:09 AM
14
A couple who defeated the government in court over the bedroom tax are being forced to appear before a judge again, in a move which could have major implications for future welfare appeals.
The Supreme Court found in favour of Jayson and Charlotte Carmichael in November, after they claimed the bedroom tax discriminated against people who needed an additional bedroom because of a disability.
The defeat forced the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to amend the rules and led to celebrations from campaigners, but the DWP now appears to be challenging the legal route the family used.
"We're totally shocked," Jayson Carmichael told Politics.co.uk.
Opinion Former News
Child Poverty Action Group: DWP drops Supreme Court appeal over disabled children ‘bedroom tax’
Low Incomes Tax Reform Group: How the tax credit changes will affect you
Campaigners call for clarity on the treatment of couples in the tax system
Opinion Former Video
The future of veterinary nursing
RCVS VN Futures
<>
More videos
"We thought it was all over when we left the Supreme Court. The lawyers seemed to think so as well. We feel like the nightmare has returned to haunt us."
The couple's legal battle against the bedroom tax began in 2014 when a judge at a first tier tribunal ruled that the policy was in breach of their human rights.
The family suffered a series of legal defeats after this initial victory. The DWP decided to appeal against the decision and around the same time the Carmichaels' separate application for a judicial review of the underlying legislation was dismissed in the high court. That decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
It was only when the couple took their fight to the Supreme Court that they eventually defeated the government.
Months after the defeat, however, the DWP is now arguing that the first tier tribunal didn't have the right to rule on human rights grounds in the first place.
The government's lawyers are due to lay out their argument in more detail tomorrow but at an initial hearing earlier this month, they claimed that a first tier tribunal only has the power to identify that legislation is incompatible with the Human Rights Act - not to rule on a case on that basis.
If the government is successful, it could prevent people from relying on the Human Rights Act to appeal against benefits decisions at the first tier tribunal, a route commonly used by many families to change decisions.
If that was to happen, the next best option available would be to apply to the high court for a judicial review, a process the government itself says can be "complex, expensive and time-consuming".
The DWP insists that the outcome of the case will not affect the Carmichaels directly but campaigners are concerned about the impact it could have on the numerous bedroom tax cases still pending at the tribunal.
A spokesperson for the DWP said:
"Removing the spare room subsidy has made the benefits system fairer for those who use it as well as those who pay for it.
"In most cases, Local Authorities are best placed to understand the needs of their residents, which is why we will have given them over £1bn by the end of this parliament for Discretionary Housing Payments to ensure that people in difficult situations don't lose out
Posted by jeffrey davies [86.17.83.77] on 16 March 2017
reply | edit & publish | delete
jeffs post or ferrrets
The Metropolitan police is among the forces that have passed files to the CPS [Image: Kirsty O’Connor/PA].
Only days after we were told police forces may seek prosecutions against sitting MPs “within weeks”, up to 20 Tory MPs are facing court action for alleged spending fraud in the 2015 general election.
And more police forces have yet to make a decision.
Theresa May’s Conservative government is now in serious trouble. With her majority in Parliament wafer-thin, if only a few of these MPs are prosecuted and lose their seats, she will lose her mandate to govern.
She might consider holding a snap general election, but she would not be able to rely on her party alone to repeal the Fixed Term Parliaments Act brought in by her forerunner David Cameron (ironically, to keep himself in office) and the Opposition parties may well wish her to suffer the damage that political impotence would do to the Tories if they became a minority government.
On the other hand, any governing party having to call a general election after being forced to admit in the courts that it had cheated in order to win the last one is unlikely to hold the public’s confidence.
The Electoral Commission is holding an inquiry into whether the Conservative Party – nationally – broke spending limits, and this may well create further upset.
And what will the MPs under suspicion say, if they lose in court? Already some have broken ranks to complain at their treatment by Conservative Central HQ – can this not be interpreted as an admission of some kind of guilt?
A dozen police forces have passed files to the Crown Prosecution Service over allegations that up to 20 Conservative MPs broke local spending limits at the last general election.
Prosecutors have to decide whether to charge the MPs or their agents, after a 10-month investigation into whether party spending on an election battlebus that brought activists to marginal seats was wrongly recorded as national spending.
Prosecutors have already received files from 12 police forces – in Avon and Somerset, Cumbria, Derbyshire, Devon and Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Greater Manchester, Lincolnshire, London, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire and West Yorkshire.
Warwickshire police also said they had interviewed two people as part of their investigation, and a decision would be made soon about whether to hand the file to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Downing Street refused on Wednesday night to comment on the development, but senior party figures are concerned that any successful prosecutions of sitting MPs could lead to election results being declared void, causing a string of byelections as the Brexit negotiations draw to a conclusion in late 2018 or early 2019.
Police have not named the Conservative MPs or agents under investigation, but it emerged on Tuesday that Craig Mackinlay, the Tory MP for South Thanet, was interviewed under caution over spending returns related to his electoral battle against the Ukip leader, Nigel Farage.
Channel 4 also revealed separate allegations concerning South Thanet, showing that the hotel expenses of a team of Conservative party officials, including Nick Timothy, who is now May’s chief of staff, had been recorded as national rather than local.
A separate Electoral Commission inquiry into whether the national party broke election spending limits is also under way and is expected to come to a head soon, potentially within days.
There was even speculation in Westminster that May would consider seeking an early general election to draw a line under the spending allegations about the 2015 election.
Adding to pressure on May, the party is facing a mutiny from Conservative MPs under investigation who feel they have been hung out to dry by the party, which organised the battlebus campaign centrally
Posted by jeffrey davies on 16 March 2017
=================================
hmm news labour pigs at the trough Since 2010, the Tories’ vicious austerity program has resulted in a colossal 37% drop in funding for local government. Vital services, often the last line of defence between people and complete financial or social ruin, have been cut to the bone, when not amputated altogether.
Playgrounds, libraries, leisure centres, community centres, emergency services, mental health services, public transport, meals on wheels, social care, homelessness shelters, women’s refuges – these are just some of the services which the Tory government considers to be optional extras in a civilised society.
The only thing this proves is that there is nothing “civilised” about the Tories vision of society.
It is difficult to posit an exact figure, but the human loss in all of this has been massive. One recent academic report stated that in 2015 alone, the death rate in Britain leapt up by nearly 30,000 (the biggest increase since the Second World War).
It’s not for nothing that socialists refer to life under capitalism as a “war” between different classes. The number of casualties certainly seems to vindicate this view.
Labour-led councils have been in the unfortunate position of having to dole out these murderous cuts. They hold their nose and vote for austerity because, they say, there is no other option.
Campaigners and unions (GMB, the Welsh TUC, and Unite and UNISON’s local government service groups) who have asked them to desist, to find some other alternative, have been told in no uncertain terms that it is not possible. Labour councillors claim that to refuse to carry out government cuts would be illegal and would result in the Tories sending in commissioners to take over the running of councils.
This is just plain wrong. The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) has argued consistently that Labour councils can set legal no cuts budgets to stop the cuts.
The proof of this? TUSC councillors in Southampton, Leicester, and Warrington proposed anti-austerity no cuts budgets in 2013, 2014, and 2016 respectively, and the council finance officers, on each occasion, approved them as legal.
It is hardly surprising that Labour councillors are so meek when it comes to opposing Tory cuts. Before Corbyn’s election in 2015, the official Labour Party position was to support a more restrained, but no less deadly, form of austerity.
Many of Labour’s current councillors would prefer us to forget this fact.
But it seems that some Labour councillors are beginning to wake up to the catastrophic implications of being seen to carry out the Tories’ dirty work.
This is why, just last week, a Labour-led council in North Ayrshire claimed to pass a budget which used its reserves to stop the cuts. Council leader Joe Cullinane was quoted in the Morning Star:
“I have proposed the most radical, anti-austerity budget seen in North Ayrshire for many years and I am absolutely delighted that it has passed. It stops the cuts and invests in our future.”
If true, this would have been fantastic news. But a closer look at the details of the North Ayrshire council’s budget reveals that it is not the genuine no cuts budget that Cullinane and the Morning Star claim.
Part of the reason that the North Ayrshire council have been able to fend off some of the worst cuts is because of 3% hikes in the council tax and rent increases of 2.79% for council tenants.
A no cuts budget which is paid for by further taxing the poor – an austerity no cuts budget, if you like – is hardly worthy of the name.
Worse still, the budget which Cullinane claims to be the “most radical, anti-austerity budget” North Ayrshire has ever seen, actually contains significant cuts!
Although the Labour administration plans to invest an additional £12.3 million in the local community and stop some of the planned cuts being passed onto councils by the Scottish Government, the Labour council are not reversing the £4.8 million cuts agreed by the previous Scottish National Party (SNP) administration for 2017/18. (North Ayrshire changed from SNP to Labour control as a result of a recent by election).
Far from being an anti-austerity no cuts budget, then, the North Ayrshire council are passing on a cuts budget.
So why mention it? From a socialist perspective, the developments in North Ayrshire are important for four main reasons.
First, it adds weight to the argument put forward by advocates of genuine, fighting no cuts budgets, and the policy passed by Unison and Unite local government unions, that councils have significant financial powers to stop cuts.
Second, North Ayrshire’s approval of a “no cuts budget”, in words if not in reality, reflects the growing pressure from trade unionists and anti-cuts campaigners for Labour to fight back against the cuts, whether from the Tories or the SNP. Fighting, anti-austerity ideas are clearly beginning to gain an echo in wider society.
Third, if Labour-led councils claim to be carrying out no cuts budgets, does this mean we can finally put to bed the idea that they are illegal? Or should we expect government commissioners to burst into North Ayrshire council any day now? Alternatively, will the Labour-led council in North Ayrshire be willing to admit that they are lying about setting a no cuts budget?
Fourth, and perhaps most important of all, is the fact that Labour councillors in North Ayrshire clearly believe that their best chance of being re-elected is by adopting a “radical no cuts budget”.
Following Labour’s shameful display during the Scottish Independence referendum in 2014, it is likely that North Ayrshire Labour will be trounced in the upcoming council elections this May. Their fake no cuts budget proposal is a transparent attempt to mitigate their losses ahead of these elections, helping them to pose as a genuine socialist alternative to SNP (and Tory) austerity.
This is important not so much because the North Ayrshire councillors are lying, but because it demonstrates what the Labour councillors believe is necessary if they are to stand a chance of winning in the May council elections. Clearly they believe that their best chance is to make themselves appear as radical as possible – absolutely 100% opposed to austerity – although they lack the fortitude to carry through on these claims!
Labour councils across the country can learn a lesson or two from this.
Labour councils should make use of prudential borrowing powers, reserves, and capitalisation as a way of temporarily stopping the cuts, but also buying time to build a popular campaign to defeat austerity.
If Corbyn’s Labour were to adopt such a fighting strategy, they would have the backing of the trade union movement and the thousands of anti-cuts campaigns that have been built around the country.
The trade union movement and the wider public are becoming more vocal in their demands for Labour to fight back against Tory and SNP cuts, now not later! To ignore these demands, as one Labour council leader recently stated, would be to commit “political and electoral suicide.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 12 March 2017
hmm news labour pigs at the trough Since 2010, the Tories’ vicious austerity program has resulted in a colossal 37% drop in funding for local government. Vital services, often the last line of defence between people and complete financial or social ruin, have been cut to the bone, when not amputated altogether.
Playgrounds, libraries, leisure centres, community centres, emergency services, mental health services, public transport, meals on wheels, social care, homelessness shelters, women’s refuges – these are just some of the services which the Tory government considers to be optional extras in a civilised society.
The only thing this proves is that there is nothing “civilised” about the Tories vision of society.
It is difficult to posit an exact figure, but the human loss in all of this has been massive. One recent academic report stated that in 2015 alone, the death rate in Britain leapt up by nearly 30,000 (the biggest increase since the Second World War).
It’s not for nothing that socialists refer to life under capitalism as a “war” between different classes. The number of casualties certainly seems to vindicate this view.
Labour-led councils have been in the unfortunate position of having to dole out these murderous cuts. They hold their nose and vote for austerity because, they say, there is no other option.
Campaigners and unions (GMB, the Welsh TUC, and Unite and UNISON’s local government service groups) who have asked them to desist, to find some other alternative, have been told in no uncertain terms that it is not possible. Labour councillors claim that to refuse to carry out government cuts would be illegal and would result in the Tories sending in commissioners to take over the running of councils.
This is just plain wrong. The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) has argued consistently that Labour councils can set legal no cuts budgets to stop the cuts.
The proof of this? TUSC councillors in Southampton, Leicester, and Warrington proposed anti-austerity no cuts budgets in 2013, 2014, and 2016 respectively, and the council finance officers, on each occasion, approved them as legal.
It is hardly surprising that Labour councillors are so meek when it comes to opposing Tory cuts. Before Corbyn’s election in 2015, the official Labour Party position was to support a more restrained, but no less deadly, form of austerity.
Many of Labour’s current councillors would prefer us to forget this fact.
But it seems that some Labour councillors are beginning to wake up to the catastrophic implications of being seen to carry out the Tories’ dirty work.
This is why, just last week, a Labour-led council in North Ayrshire claimed to pass a budget which used its reserves to stop the cuts. Council leader Joe Cullinane was quoted in the Morning Star:
“I have proposed the most radical, anti-austerity budget seen in North Ayrshire for many years and I am absolutely delighted that it has passed. It stops the cuts and invests in our future.”
If true, this would have been fantastic news. But a closer look at the details of the North Ayrshire council’s budget reveals that it is not the genuine no cuts budget that Cullinane and the Morning Star claim.
Part of the reason that the North Ayrshire council have been able to fend off some of the worst cuts is because of 3% hikes in the council tax and rent increases of 2.79% for council tenants.
A no cuts budget which is paid for by further taxing the poor – an austerity no cuts budget, if you like – is hardly worthy of the name.
Worse still, the budget which Cullinane claims to be the “most radical, anti-austerity budget” North Ayrshire has ever seen, actually contains significant cuts!
Although the Labour administration plans to invest an additional £12.3 million in the local community and stop some of the planned cuts being passed onto councils by the Scottish Government, the Labour council are not reversing the £4.8 million cuts agreed by the previous Scottish National Party (SNP) administration for 2017/18. (North Ayrshire changed from SNP to Labour control as a result of a recent by election).
Far from being an anti-austerity no cuts budget, then, the North Ayrshire council are passing on a cuts budget.
So why mention it? From a socialist perspective, the developments in North Ayrshire are important for four main reasons.
First, it adds weight to the argument put forward by advocates of genuine, fighting no cuts budgets, and the policy passed by Unison and Unite local government unions, that councils have significant financial powers to stop cuts.
Second, North Ayrshire’s approval of a “no cuts budget”, in words if not in reality, reflects the growing pressure from trade unionists and anti-cuts campaigners for Labour to fight back against the cuts, whether from the Tories or the SNP. Fighting, anti-austerity ideas are clearly beginning to gain an echo in wider society.
Third, if Labour-led councils claim to be carrying out no cuts budgets, does this mean we can finally put to bed the idea that they are illegal? Or should we expect government commissioners to burst into North Ayrshire council any day now? Alternatively, will the Labour-led council in North Ayrshire be willing to admit that they are lying about setting a no cuts budget?
Fourth, and perhaps most important of all, is the fact that Labour councillors in North Ayrshire clearly believe that their best chance of being re-elected is by adopting a “radical no cuts budget”.
Following Labour’s shameful display during the Scottish Independence referendum in 2014, it is likely that North Ayrshire Labour will be trounced in the upcoming council elections this May. Their fake no cuts budget proposal is a transparent attempt to mitigate their losses ahead of these elections, helping them to pose as a genuine socialist alternative to SNP (and Tory) austerity.
This is important not so much because the North Ayrshire councillors are lying, but because it demonstrates what the Labour councillors believe is necessary if they are to stand a chance of winning in the May council elections. Clearly they believe that their best chance is to make themselves appear as radical as possible – absolutely 100% opposed to austerity – although they lack the fortitude to carry through on these claims!
Labour councils across the country can learn a lesson or two from this.
Labour councils should make use of prudential borrowing powers, reserves, and capitalisation as a way of temporarily stopping the cuts, but also buying time to build a popular campaign to defeat austerity.
If Corbyn’s Labour were to adopt such a fighting strategy, they would have the backing of the trade union movement and the thousands of anti-cuts campaigns that have been built around the country.
The trade union movement and the wider public are becoming more vocal in their demands for Labour to fight back against Tory and SNP cuts, now not later! To ignore these demands, as one Labour council leader recently stated, would be to commit “political and electoral suicide.
Posted by jeffrey davies on 12 March 2017
PAGE ADMIN
