Kay Phillips

Lansley’s Sick Lullaby

2010-07-14T06:41:00.000-07:00

Andrew Lansley, the Conservative Health Minister, has blown the trumpet call for the privatization of the National Health Service. Using the fear that has been well-stoked by the ConDem government, a major attack on the principles of free health care in the UK has been announced. Without an ounce of shame, Lansley declared a complete dismissal of the promises made by both Conservatives and Liberal Democrats during the general election campaign. In other words, no-one voted for this but the government wishes to do it anyway.

After 13 years of New Labour changes in the NHS, including creeping privatization, the very last thing needed was a new re-organization. Lansley has confirmed that General Practitioner (GP) practices will be expected to take on planning and commissioning of health care over the next four years, thus removing the role of Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) in planning.

Dr Kay Phillips, a practicing GP and National Chair of the Respect Party, was not impressed by the changes. ‘GPs are trained in clinical diagnosis not financial planning or management. Most GPs do not want to be finance managers; they just want to be left to treat patients. This re-organization will put GPs at the forefront of making cuts and bringing in private companies.

‘We have suffered 13 years of Labour government meddling in the NHS that has led to partial privatization and cost huge amounts of money. Now, the ConDems want to drive this ideological attack on the NHS further. The basic fact is that they hate the idea of a state run, free health service at the point of use. Drug companies see big profits from breaking up the NHS and the ConDems do their bidding.’

The plans amount to an invitation to privatization by making GPs form companies and tender out NHS services. With the break-up of a national service, the pensions and national pay bargaining of NHS staff will be destroyed.

An illustration of the cost of bringing the private sector to healthcare is that Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs) has saddled the British people with £200 billion of debt in the form of repayments to private contractors, according to the Office of National Statistics. Another is the recent revelation that £26 million was handed to a private company by Greater Manchester PCTs for operations that were not performed. This occurred because of a contract for 9,000 operations between 2005 and 2009.

Naturally, Andrew Lansley has huge experience of the lives of the poorest in our society for whom free health care is essential. He went to a private school, Brentwood, and worked as a senior civil servant for Norman Tebbit. His qualifications for dealing with health include his claims that obesity will be increased by seeing obese people and stating in 2008 the recession would be good as more people would spend time with their families. What a shame he has not taken his own advice.

The Respect Party believes this is a completely unnecessary attack motivated by free market fundamentalism in the government. We welcome the declared opposition of the major trade unions in the NHS, UNITE and UNISON. These unworkable and destructive plans can and must be stopped.

Blackhearted Love: ConDems and the public debt

2010-07-05T09:31:00.001-07:00

Are we all in the same boat together? Gideon Osborne, our aristocratic Tory Chancellor, insists that the level of ‘public debt’ means we all have to tighten our belts and make hard choices. He fails to mention that a very small group on British society created this huge debt with banking speculation. He also ignores the twenty year period of continuous tax cuts and evasion for the richest that explain so much of the debt.

While the majority has faced wage freezes and job losses since 2008, there is one group of wage militants who have seen their income rise dramatically. UK top executives receive an average of £3.1 million per year as a salary, according to figures released today. This represents a 5% wage rise since 2008. This seems obscene enough in a period of mass unemployment created by the very executives paying themselves such huge amounts.

However, the bosses have moved towards annual bonuses to supplement their meager income. These bonuses will reach up to 300% of annual salary and, even in smaller companies, will get to 100%. Of course, we all understand bonuses that relate to company performance or ‘performance related pay’ which companies tried to introduce across British industry. This is not what executives mean by it.

Cliff Weight, director of MM&K (one of those leading the study), explained that ‘many performance-related pay schemes appear designed to satisfy the Chief Executive Officer and in fact offer little incentive for anything above just 'adequate' performance’. In other words, the bonuses are almost inevitable for these executives but just do not appear as salary for tax purposes.

Most of us never experience such wealth in a lifetime yet alone a year. Why has there been no freeze for chief executives? Why are they not paying back the money lost in the recession or taken from the public finances?

The public schoolboy government of the ConDems is not about necessary cuts or hard choices. It is starting an austerity programme designed to break the modern notion of the welfare state. This attempt to shrink the public finances is about abandoning the safety net to the poorest caught in the recession. It is about refusing to accept responsibility for the lost jobs and refusing help to those without the right home or enough money to look after their families. It is about ending the very limited wealth redistribution in taxation and benefits.

This government intends to change the role of the state away from helping the poorest and relieving the tax burden on their rich friends, in whose name they govern. By the way, did you know that David Cameron is a direct royal descendant of King William IV? So, another aristocrat who hides it and another pretending to promote fairness in society from a position of privilege and without hard choices as we know them.

A Sympathetic Noose: Gideon shows his colours

2010-06-22T09:08:00.001-07:00

The ConDem government claims to be ‘progressive’. It is nothing of the kind. Led by no less than three public school boys in Cameron, Clegg and Osborne, this is rule by bankers and the rich in the interests of bankers and the rich. Gideon Osborne, the 18^th baronet of Ballentaylor (old Anglo-Irish aristocracy), has unveiled an ‘emergency budget’ that strangles the poor while delivering handouts to the rich.

Sympathetic

This budget is sprinkled with minor measures that seem to help the poorest. State pensions are to be linked to earnings or rise by 2.5%. This is welcome but goes nowhere near addressing the poverty that pensioners are in after more than 20 years of pensions getting smaller. Those earning under £7,475 per year will now be exempt from income tax.

The only way that these can be considered ‘progressive’ is by reference to the appalling record of New Labour in tackling poverty while in government.

The noose

The reality of this budget for working people is that we will be expected to pay for the bailout of the banks. VAT is to rise to 20% - this is regressive taxation as it will affect everyone regardless of income so hits the poor hardest. It is the taxation model of the poll tax. This rise alone will wipe out any gains in state pensions.

Public sector workers are to suffer a pay freeze for two years, when most are already underpaid. For those earning under £21,000, there will be a flat £250 pay rise (again this does not cover the rise in VAT alone). There will be 25% cuts in most government departments, which signal more job losses, so raising the welfare needs in society.

While we suffer a housing crisis, the ConDems will not help. Instead, Gideon the aristocrat will put a cap on housing benefit with no recognition that the lack of council houses is the factor pushing private sector rents up and raising the cost of housing benefit. Child benefit is to be frozen for three years in a country with the highest level of child poverty in Europe. The general linking of benefits to the Consumer Prices Index is designed to stop benefit rises so contributing the extending poverty in Britain.

Paying the hangman

While there are cuts for the poor, the rich are given even more tax breaks. Capital Gains Tax is an instrument for taxing wealth which is created when selling stocks, bonds or property. It taxes speculators. Yet the ConDems have decided to increase the loophole that allows the rich to only pay 10% on the first £5 million. Before 1998, it was normal to pay 40%, the same rate as income tax for the rich at the time.

Corporation Tax is a tax on profits, which have risen for the richest in the recession. The banks were recording multi billion pound profits even as they demanded bailouts. New Labour started cutting this tax for the rich and the ConDems have gone further reducing it to 24% over the next four years.

The Chancellor has proposed a banking levy from January 2011 but this will only be £2 billion and it is unclear whether it will be a ‘one-off’ levy. When set against the banking bailout, it is ridiculously small and ineffectual. The National Audit Office puts the actual cost at £850 billion, including £76billion given to Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds to buy their worthless shares, £200 billion to increase credit (a measure that failed), £250 billion to guarantee bank borrowing, £40 billion in loans to failing banks and £280 billion to insure banking debt (which could be as high as £2 trillion).

This is a budget that cuts the services, jobs and pay of the poorest while handing out tax breaks and handshakes to the rich.

Respect’s alternative

The public debt is £903 billion. Most of this is a result of the banking bailout and the increased cost of unemployment to the state. There need to be more jobs not less. Respect would start a programme to convert Britain to environmentally friendly power with the aim of creating 1 million jobs. It rejects the idea of cutting public sector jobs.

Respect would launch a council house building and renovation programme which would create jobs, homes and relieve the rent burden on housing benefit.

The banks and energy companies are getting away with huge rip-offs. Respect would raise Corporation Tax back to 30%. This would bring in over £6 billion per year - enough to double spending on higher education. This money could scrap tuition fees and introduce universal student grants. And a 'Robin Hood tax' of 0.5% on financial dealings in the City would bring in an estimated £250 billion. Respect would also clamp down on tax evasion by the richest, which cost the UK more than £100 billion per year. And if there must be cuts we would start by cancelling Trident and ending our costly wars abroad.

There is no need to cut public services or benefits. There is no need to tax the poor.

RELEASE THESE HEROES NOW

2010-06-01T08:09:00.001-07:00

The Respect Party is calling on the British government to act urgently to secure the release of 28 British nationals who are confirmed missing after the Israeli assault on the Gaza aid flotilla. These were members and supporters of Viva Palestina, the Free Gaza movement and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign. So far, the Foreign Office has failed to reply to urgent requests for information regarding the fate of these heroic volunteers.

All were aboard ships taking 10,000 tonnes of construction materials and human assistance to Gaza in defiance of the illegal and inhumane Israeli blockade. The flotilla was attacked in international waters and so far 19 aid volunteers are known to have died. This was an act of piracy and murder.

All five ships were boarded, commandeered and towed to Ashdod port in Israel . The aid was confiscated and all the aid volunteers were arrested. The Israeli government has failed to release any information on their whereabouts or health so they are missing at this time. The full list of those who we know are missing is below.

Among them is Kevin Ovenden, the international coordinator and leading force in the creation and development of Viva Palestina. He has led three aid convoys to break the siege of Gaza since March 2009 and is the epitome of tireless heroism and sacrifice in support of Palestine .

Kevin is a hugely influential and cherished comrade in the Respect Party. He is a member of the Executive Committee, the National Council and a leading figure in Tower Hamlets Respect. He led the Viva Palestina group that joined the Gaza aid flotilla this week and carries the pride and passion of our entire party and movement with dignity and intelligence in this daring mission.

We demand the immediate release of Kevin Ovenden. The Respect Party has firm information that Kevin was unharmed in the assault on the flotilla and we expect his unharmed release from detention forthwith.

We demand the release of all those detained in this murderous attack. These people are heroes who have risked everything to help Palestine . They will be honoured upon return. In particular, we draw attention to Ahsan Shamruk, who travelled with Viva Palestina and was injured in the attack. He is reported to be in a stable condition and we send our thoughts and wishes for his safe return home.

The full list of British nationals (provisional) is as follows:
Laura Macdonald Stuart
Ebrahim Musaji
Jamal Sayed
Parveen Yaqub
Baboo Adem Zanghar
Ahsan Shamruk
Mustafa Cengiz Ahmet
Tauqir Sharif
Boudejma Bounoua
Mohammad Bounoua
Sakir Yildirim
Kenneth O'Keefe
Ali El-Awaisi
Mohammed Bhaiyat
Lort Phillips Alexandra Mary
Sarah Nancy Colborne
Ismail Adam Patel
Nader Daher
Mahi Mohammed Abid
Nur-E-Azom Choudhury
Kevin Ovenden
Peter Venner
Clifford Gardner Hanley
Muzzammil Layth Chogley
Jamaluddin Mohammad Farid Elshayyal
Hassan Al Banna Ghani
Lazrag Salah
Ali Altan

Massacre in the Mediterranean

2010-05-31T15:03:00.000-07:00

Viva Palestina founder George Galloway released the following statement today:

"Israel has massacred unarmed peace activists aboard a flotilla taking emergency aid to the besieged Palestinian people in Gaza. This is a watershed that will change the perception of the world, as Sharpeville and Soweto did to the Apartheid regime in South Africa.

"It unmasks Israel which no-one can now consider a member of the 'international community' but is rather a rogue state, a pariah state.

"The embargo and blockade of Gaza must be brought to an end. This has been underwritten by the United States, by Britain and the European Union, but this has got to end now."

Progressive Politics after the General Election

2010-05-25T14:07:00.001-07:00

The battle for our public services has begun. The new ConDem government has pledged to impose devastating cuts on public spending. The plans to reduce the deficit will be accelerated, with the burden falling on public spending rather than increased taxes for the better off.

Already, more than £6 billion of cuts have been announced with more to follow in the next four months as the coalition government builds its confidence. The economic crisis in the Eurozone and its effect on the British banking system is fuelling the increased pace of public service cutbacks.

The programme of the new government amounts to one of the most severe attacks in British history on public services, jobs and the living standards of working people and the poor. To minimise resistance and to strengthen itself, the government plans to rewrite the rules to force further coalition government in the event of failure rather than calling a new general election (the 55% rule). Cameron aims to reduce the number of MPs in a move that is widely believed will cost Labour up to 40 seats. The coalition has also pledged to ‘pursue a detailed agreement on limiting donations and reforming party funding in order to remove big money from politics’.

The last measure, from parties funded largely by super-rich individuals, aims to attack the right of trade unions to fund political parties – a direct attack on the Labour Party and the rights of working people in general to organise to secure political representation.

The outcome of the General Election is a weak, unstable government seeking to limit democracy to strengthen itself while embarking on protracted confrontation with all those who wish to defend jobs, wages, pensions and public services. This will be accompanied by a rise in racism – which the mainstream parties will either pander to or directly promote. This has already been signalled by the new measures attacking ‘economic migrants’.

The General Election

The General Election saw a 5% swing from Labour to the Tories; not enough for Cameron to form a majority government, but enough to force Labour from office. The hung parliament was a victory for none of the three major parties.

David Cameron, Etonian public schoolboy, is Prime Minister with the lowest share of the vote of any Tory party in history. He is only able to move into No.10 with the support of the Liberal Democrats, led by the ‘Orange Book’ group of right wing neo-liberals. Cameron describes the new alliance as socially liberal and economically conservative. Although the Liberal Democrats lost seats, their share of the vote increased since 2005 as many became desperate for an alternative to Labour and the Tories.

Many of these voters face the reality that they voted Lib Dem but got the Tories. The Liberal Democrats have already ditched key commitments such as the scrapping of Trident and the demand for a genuinely new voting system based on proportion representation (the alternative vote system we may be offered in a referendum is likely to entrench the dominance of the old order rather than challenge it.) Vince Cable, Lib Dem Business Secretary, will be instrumental in the plans to privatise the Royal Mail.

Millions of voters had already deserted Labour out of disgust at Blair’s alliance with Bush over the Iraq war. Under Gordon Brown, Labour lost a further section of its base as his economic and social policies unravelled.

But Labour’s vote did not collapse in this election. The justified fear of Tory plans brought large numbers of people to the polls to vote Labour, in what was perceived as the only practical way of stopping a Tory government. It was not necessarily a positive Labour vote but an anti-Tory vote mobilized by fear. Many that had deserted Labour in protest since 1997 came out to vote, so there was a higher turnout than 2005.

The 5% swing to the Tories was not uniform. In the urban centres, particularly where Labour was historically strong, the swings were much less – and in some cases reversed.

In 40 constituencies in London the average swing was to the Tories just 1.6%, and there were 13 constituencies which saw a swing to Labour of an average of 3.1%. These were in the north-east and east of the city with large black and Asian communities and high concentrations of poverty. In total, there were 27 seats in England where there was a swing to Labour. All of these were in poor urban areas; 13 in London, 4 in Birmingham, 2 in Liverpool and so on. In Scotland, 27 seats saw swings from the Tories to Labour – as many as in the whole of England and again concentrated in urban areas.

The General Election was, in the end, dominated by the stark choice between a Labour and a Tory government. The TV debates increased the sense that only votes for the three major parties mattered. With very few exceptions indeed, smaller parties and independents were squeezed out of the debate and overwhelmed by the surge of support for the main parties. Independents that had fought off Labour and the Tories in previous elections such as Dr Richard Taylor (Wyre Forest) or Dai Davies (Blaenau Gwent) were swamped on this occasion, both losing their seats.

The election of Caroline Lucas as Green Party MP in Brighton Pavilion was a rare and welcome exception. It was built on a platform of 17 local Green Party councillors and ward based campaigning over many years with a positive national profile for Caroline herself. But this was not a nationwide turn to the Greens as elsewhere the Green Party suffered a similar squeeze to other small parties.

The other positive aspect of the election was the weakening of the threat from the far right. The BNP was wiped out in Barking and Dagenham and failed to make the gains expected in Stoke and elsewhere. The combination of the main party squeeze and strong campaigning facilitated this but it should not obscure the reality that the BNP polled 564,000 votes nationally – up from 193,000 in 2005. Likewise, the vote for UKIP increased from 603,000 to 918,000. That is 1.5 million votes for parties based on racist and/or xenophobic appeal.

The Labour vote

When faced with the prospect of a Tory government, many voters were prepared to vote Labour. With Labour now in opposition and a ConDem government attacking living standards, it is very likely that support for Labour in its ‘heartlands’ will be sustained. This is a fact of electoral politics that Respect must take very seriously.

The Labour Party vote was historically appalling. It polled only 200,000 votes more than the 1983 vote. This was when Labour had suffered the split to for the SDP and Labour’s manifesto was compared to that of the Communist Party’s and described by Labour’s Gerald Kaufman as ‘ the longest suicide note in history’. (Though it must be said that Kaufman’s 22,469 votes in 1983 compares somewhat favourably with the 19,211 (50.1% he received on 6th May 2010). Labour’s share of the total potential vote was lower than at any point since the 1930s.

The leadership election illustrates the problem of Labour’s lack of a coherent progressive alternative to the ConDems. The three front-runners all claim that part of the problem for Labour was that it was not tough enough on immigration, while their policy differences with Blair and Brown remain marginal.

Even though the leadership election is highly likely to signal more of the New Labour mould, and with it a failure to resist the coalition government, it is also likely to be the beneficiary of attempts to remove the ConDem government - with many concluding that backing Labour will be the most effective anti-Tory vote. This is bound to squeeze the electoral possibilities of progressive parties like Respect.

Local Elections

In the local elections held on the same day as the General Election, Labour won back control of a number of local councils in urban areas. The first indications are that the ConDem government will push the burden of public service cuts onto local councils so posing an important question for Labour councils. Do they act as a shield for working class people and refuse to implement cuts or lead the way in slashing services and jobs? This dilemma has the potential to provoke deep splits in the Labour membership and electoral support.

Respect and the election

The Respect Party is historically unique in British politics. It is a party with localised but significant electoral support that has at its core the principles of anti-imperialism and anti-racism. It was born from the womb of the anti-war movement and resistance to Islamophobia since 11 September 2001. At this election, Respect sought to widen its position to embrace a critique of the public service cuts consensus and the bailing out of the bankers at the expense of society.

We had a genuine opportunity to create a small national platform for radical politics based on the values of peace, justice and equality. The election of even one Respect MP, to sit alongside Caroline Lucas in parliament, would have made a powerful impact on politics generally and helped the left to rally opposition to the public service cuts.

We fought positive and powerful campaigns but failed to win any of our three target seats. Respect lost 7 of its 8 councillors in Tower Hamlets and its only councillor in Newham. However well we performed in the election, and in some cases we performed very well indeed, the failure to win a parliamentary seat was deeply disappointing. There are no prizes for coming second in first-past-the-post elections.

Nonetheless, Respect’s achievements are worthy of note.

Birmingham

The vote for Salma Yaqoob in Birmingham Hall Green was unique. Her vote increased from a notional 7,500 in 2005 to 12,240 and her share of the vote went up from a notional 16.2% in 2005 to 25.1%. (The ‘notional’ figures take account of boundary changes). Salma’s campaign succeeded in gaining the support of the outgoing left-wing Labour MP and the endorsement of Caroline Lucas and the Green Party. It achieved a 11.7% swing from Labour to Respect (bigger than the 8.4% Lucas achieved in Brighton).

The swing runs counter to all the national trends and in the circumstances of this election was a remarkable achievement. Salma’s re-election as a local councillor was a vote of confidence and ensures Respect has a continued political platform with 3 councillors in Birmingham City Council. Respect polled 10,646 local council votes (21.8%) over four wards, an outstanding achievement.

East London

In other areas the Respect parliamentary vote was squeezed badly. Both Abjol Miah and George Galloway recorded strong votes but were ultimately unable to resist the surge of support for Labour. In the local elections in East London, our core vote held up very well but it was swamped by the general election turnout.

In Tower Hamlets, Respect polled 16,236 votes (15%) across 17 wards with 50 candidates, coming second with increased votes in 5 wards. In Newham, Respect polled 3,448 (12.1%) in 4 wards, coming second in two and third in two. These are historically high votes for a radical party.

We can be very proud of the campaigns we fought, and of the work of our candidates and campaign teams. Respect reached a very large new audience, engaged it with some success but ultimately, its loyalty remained with Labour and, to a lesser extent, the Liberal Democrats. There is no escaping the consequences of these results. We are unable to create the national platform that we had hoped for. And we have lost all but one of our councillors in East London.

A challenging situation

We now face a very challenging situation. The areas where we competed seriously with Labour proved to be those areas that stayed most loyal to it, especially when faced with a Tory government. The biggest swings to Labour were from exactly the kind of areas where Respect was standing.

Respect retains a strong base of support in Birmingham and East London with some effective though small electoral footholds in other cities such as Bradford, Rochdale and Manchester. But, in planning for the future, Respect will have to take full account of the fact that in most areas of the country, opposition to the ConDem government is likely to be expressed firstly by voting Labour.

The problem we face is how we develop a strategy around the positive contribution Respect can make to the struggle against the ConDem government, in terms of developing opposition to the public service cuts, alongside maintaining and ultimately expanding Respect’s electoral support in areas where we retain a significant base.

The future

Respect was formed because there was a need to oppose war, oppose racism and to stand up for public services and social justice. It has never been an exclusively electoral party. Respect is an electoral party and also a campaigning force between elections. It has a proud record from the Gaza solidarity movement, including initiating the remarkable Viva Palestina convoys, the Yes4mayor campaign in Tower Hamlets, in Manchester campaigns such as Free Public Transport or ‘School places for all’ and initiatives for new community facilities and funding for the local swimming pool.

Peace, justice and equality remain as necessary today as they were when Respect was formed in 2004. We will continue to speak for these principles and find every possible way to connect with those who will feel the brunt of the attacks that are coming. They will hit every community and Respect will stand with every mobilisation of resistance. If the Labour councils or individuals councillors refuse to implement the Condem cuts, Respect will applaud and stand alongside them with the local community. But if those councillorchose not to defend those who voted them into office then Respect will campaign alongside everyone affected and help, to the best of our abilities, to mobilise tthe opposition.

The Respect 2010 Manifesto declared itself for ‘Jobs, Homes and Peace’ and carried a clear argument for investment rather than cuts. These ideas will be developed further to aid campaigning and help activists within and without the party. Respect intends to work with as many people as possible - from the Greens, Labour and other progressive parties as are willing to help, in giving an alternative vision of what can be done. We have a contribution to make both ideologically and practically.

There is no inevitability that ConDem cuts will lead to immediate large-scale public protest or strikes. Nonetheless, it is incumbent on those who oppose the cuts consensus to argue and explain the economic, social and environmental reasons why the neo-liberal orthodoxy is wrong – and outline our alternative. This must include the powerful arguments for the alternatives strategies needed for dealing with climate change – an issue that was woefully neglected by the major parties in the recent election.

As the cuts deepen they will produce a scramble for the little that is left on offer - and racism is likely to flourish. Respect will continue campaigning against racism and to undermine the myths about immigration which are used to divide the poorest communities where the cuts will bite.

Over the coming weeks and months Respect will be seeking to bring around us new networks of supporters. In some areas, the election campaigns have started this process. In others, Respect will need to articulate its argument against the cuts and demonstrate its campaigning ability to build such networks. It will take time and hard work, and is unlikely to be rewarded with high votes for some time.

Electoral Challenges ahead

Aware of the electoral challenges ahead, Respect will need to pick its targets carefully. In Birmingham, the priority will be to defend the council seat in Sparkbrook next May. In east London Respect locally will be assessing its tactics in relation to the autumn Mayoral election and across the city will be preparing for the Greater London Assembly elections in 2012 – held under a form of proportional voting. Elsewhere, Respect will need to adopt a much more localised electoral strategy of building support in individual wards.

In 20 of the 43 wards contested at the election, Respect polled more than 10%, while in 30 Respect polled more than 5%. In Rochdale’s Milkstone and Deeplish ward, Respect achieved 20.9%. In Manchester, Respect polled 1,830 votes (4.8%) in working class wards. Considering that Respect is contesting ground with a party that has been campaigning for more than a century, these results give grounds for hope. It will require long term campaigning over many years by every branch and group of supporters across the country to strengthen Respect into a party capable of becoming a genuinely national force. This is simply the reality of electoral politics – sudden breakthroughs such as George Galloway’s epic victory in 2005 are not the normal occurrence but are the exception. Most electoral success is developed with patient work over many years.

There were two examples of the changing character of political organisation in the election. The first was Labour’s use of technology, especially the Internet and phone banks, to mobilize support. The other was Hope Not Hate’s anti-fascist mobilisation using viral Internet campaigning methods. Respect will be seeking to adapt these methods to our own circumstances – to both strengthen own media message and reach a wider audience.

The communities from which Respect draws its support are among those most likely to be hit hardest by the ConDem government. The Liberal Democrats have been exposed as little more than bag carriers for the Tories, so its base of support in poorer urban areas is likely to come under pressure. People may vote Labour expecting it to defend them. But our experience is that New Labour will let them down badly.

While Respect is drawing many lessons from the election, its goal remains the same: wherever we have the opportunity to do so, we will seek to represent and defend our communities, and speak up for peace, justice and equality. The world is sick and needs to change in order to heal. Respect is determined to present the case for change and to work with those that seek the same.

This article is the product of debate and discussion over the last three weeks in Respect branches, which was further developed from a discussion document presented at the National Council meeting on 22 May 2010.

Lib-Dems show their true colours

2010-05-12T11:50:00.000-07:00

For many years, the Liberal Party and then the Lib-Dems were known by working class people as 'yellow Tories.' They were rightly distrusted as a party that could always be relied to side with the rich against the poor, with big business against trade unions. Yet, Labour's failures and, above all, Blair's wars abroad allowed the Lib-Dems to pose as a progressive alternative. On 11th May 2010 the Lib-Dems returned to type, ushering the Tory government so feared by working people.

"All those who vote Lib Dem in the belief that they represent a ‘progressive’ voice in British politics will be scratching their heads this morning." writes Salma Yaqoob, leader of the Respect Party. "Thanks to the Lib Dems we now have a Tory government. Working class communities, like the ones I represent in Sparkbrook, are fearful of a Tory government. And for good reason. Many remember what the Tories did last time in power. They remember mass unemployment, attacks on public services, growth of inequality, riots on our streets, and they do not want a repeat. Well, the Lib Dems have made that Tory threat real again. We will suffer for that because the Tories will swing the axe in a more brutal way than Labour would have done.

"But the Lib Dems will suffer too, " continues Salma. "This will prove toxic for the Lib Dems at the ballot box and they will bear the brunt of the backlash to the cuts from the electorate. I expect to see Lib Dems advances over the last few years in inner city Birmingham, advances made on the backs of the anti-war movement, to be wiped out in the coming period. The Liberal Democrats have shed any right to claim progressive credentials. It is only right they suffer the backlash from those who mistakenly thought otherwise of them."

After the Elections - The discussion

2010-05-10T15:29:00.001-07:00

Manchester Respect Branch meeting - Thursday 13th May
Starts 7.30pm @ Basement Meeting Room, Saffron Restaurant, 107 Cheetham Hill Rd

After the Elections - The discussion
Manchester Respect would like to welcome all those who participated in the election campaign to the meeting to take part in the post-election discussion and debate.

What next for Respect? What lessons are there to learn? What did we do well? Can we build a genuinely progressive alliance? What does the future hold for politics in Britain?

After the election - some thoughts and some thanks

2010-05-09T05:03:00.001-07:00

By Clive Searle, Respect Party National Secretary

Firstly, I would like to offer my heartfelt thanks to everyone who worked so hard in the election campaign across the country. We could not have asked for greater effort or dedication from candidates, members and supporters. Our supporters certainly cannot be criticised for a lack of effort or commitment.

But there is no hiding from reality. The 2010 General Election was not a good day for Respect. We had hoped to add to our single MP, two more in Abjol Miah and Salma Yaqoob. Instead we are reduced to none. Electoral politics is a brutal game - and where you can win elections you can just as easily lose them.

Everyone will naturally be disappointed. We are still awaiting all the council results in Tower Hamlets but they are unlikely to change the general picture. It appears that our core vote has been swamped by the huge increase in turnout.

Given the results across the country, it’s clear that we were up against a national political trend that no amount of extra campaigning would have reversed.

In Tower Hamlets and Birmingham we have fought hard to establish a political presence locally that could present Respect as a serious alternative. Elsewhere we attempted the same effect on a smaller scale.

But in this election the national picture was overwhelming. The TV debates between the three main party leaders engaged millions of people and shook up the election. The outcome, however, was the dominance of the two big parties – Labour and the Tories – with everyone else squeezed out of the picture.

So the Lib Dems, despite their initial bounce in the polls, ended up with much the same percentage as they got five years ago but with five fewer MPs. If the Lib-Dems were squeezed the smaller parties suffered even more.

Both George and Abjol were knocked back into third place with around 17% of the vote each. Only Salma managed to buck the general trend gaining an 11.7% swing from Labour to Respect – but sadly it was not enough to win. Full results can be found on this site.

In many traditionally Labour seats the fear of the Tories returning to power meant that poorer people, working people and ethnic minorities voted Labour - despite its appalling record. This also explains Labour gains in the English local elections.

The squeeze was also in play in Wales and Scotland, where the left nationalist parties lost ground to Labour. The SNP had set a target of 20 seats, but in the end they retained 6. In Wales, the independent left MP Dai Davies lost to Labour even though he and his left predecessor had held the seat at the previous two elections. Independent MP Richard Taylor in Wyre Forest who won his seat in 2001, and defended it successfully in 2005, also lost his seat to the Tories.

The leader of the Green Party, Caroline Lucas, did extremely well to win in Brighton. Her victory was a bright spark on an otherwise dark night and Respect would like to send he out heartfelt congratulations.

Elsewhere, however, even the Greens found their vote squeezed down for example Adrian Ramsay gained a creditable but 4th placed 15% in the green target seat of Norwich South. On a warmer note, the pull towards the two main parties also hit the fascists of the BNP who not only failed to get their leader elected, but also lost all their seats in Barking.

But it was still a bad night for progressive forces in Britain. Respect didn’t win an MP, but we got 16,692 votes across Tower Hamlets and 12,240 for Salma in Birmingham. And while no consolation, this is still in a different league from others on the left who also stood in the election.

We have a lot to be proud of in our record since our formation just over the last six years ago and we have a responsibility to continue to speak out for the poor and marginalised communities we seek to serve.

Whatever government emerges from the political turmoil over the coming days and weeks will move to introduce savage austerity measures, which will only increase all the social problems and suffering in towns and cities across the country. Our case for investment and not cuts remains an essential counterpoint to the cuts agenda.

Respect will be discussing over the next days how we can continue our mission to give a voice to the voiceless and to offer a political alternative based on peace, justice and equality.

The National Council will meet on Saturday 22nd May to discuss the lessons of the election and will then submit a discussion document for branches and members to discuss. At the end of June, Respect will be holding a one-day conference, open to all members, to discuss the future strategy for our organisation. We will publish details soon.

Once again I should like to thank all the members and supporters who worked so hard - not just during the election campaign but also in the many months before. A huge thank you to all our candidates who put themselves in the frame for this election. You have done us all proud.

Yours in peace and solidarity,

Clive Searle

National Secretary Respect Party

Constituency	Candidate	Vote	%
Birmingham Hall Green	Salma Yaqoob	12240	25.1%
Poplar & Limehouse	George Galloway	8160	17.5%
Bethnal Green & Bow	Abjol Miah	8532	16.8%
Bradford West	Arshad Ali	1245	3.1%
Blackley & Broughton	Kay Phillips	996	2.9%
Oldham West & Royton	Shahid Miah	627	1.5%
Manchester Gorton	Mohammed Zulfikar	507	1.3%
Garston & Halewood	Diana Raby	286	0.7%
Croydon North	Mohommad Shaikh	272	0.5%
Brent Central	Abdi Duale	230	0.5%
Enfield Southgate	Samad Billoo	174	0.4%
		33269	6.8%

Results for Blackley and Broughton

2010-05-07T08:38:00.001-07:00

Graham Stringer Labour 18,563 54.3%
James Edsberg Conservative 6,260 18.3%
William Hobhouse Liberal Democrat 4,861 14.2%
Derek Adams British National Party 2,469 7.2%
Kay Phillips Respect-Unity Coalition 996 2.9%
Bob Willescroft UK Independence Party 894 2.6%
Shafiq-Uz Zaman Christian Party 161 0.5%
Majority 12,303 36.0
Turnout 34,204 49.7 +3.8

Last few hours - the campaign goes on.

2010-05-05T13:38:00.000-07:00

With voting day just a few hours away I'd like to thank all the members of my campaign team who've been out across Blackley and Broughton over the last few weeks and months. There are too many to mention but everyone has been more then welcome and I hope to see you on Thursday for some final campaigning. With every vote needed we'll be working right to the close of polling at 10.00pm.

We'll meet from 10.00am at the campaign stall on the corner of Cheetham Hill Road and Esmond Road.

It's clear that there is an awful lot of distrust of the current political system. The sooner it is cleaned up - with fair voting and an end to the abuse of postal votes the sooner we'll be able to elect MPs and councillors who can be trusted to represent the voters and who can be turfed out if they don't.

Remember that you can also vote Respect in a number of council wards as well as in Oldham West and Royton and Manchester Gorton in the Greater Manchester area. Next time we intend, with your help to stand more candidates. And you are welcome to help us by joining Respect online here.

Attacking the weakest - utter, utter madness!

2010-05-05T00:20:00.000-07:00

There’s something particularly nasty about a desperate political party turning on the weakest in society. But Alan Johnson, Labour’s Home Secretary chose to do exactly that on Radio 4’s Today programme this morning. Attacking the Liberal Democrats Johnson declared, “They would allow asylum seekers to work, which is utter, utter madness.”

Of course, what is 'utter madness' is not allowing people who have fled persecution to work, pay taxes and become a productive part of society. Instead we make them live on pitiful state benefits at the expense of the taxpayer or lock them away in detention centres like criminals. The ban on asylum seekers working has nothing to do with a sensible asylum policy but has everything to do with trying to appear tough on immigration – while ignoring genuine concerns over issues such as the shortage of affordable housing.

I'm proud to have signed the Liberty's Asylum pledge. I wish a few more Labour candidates had as well.
Kay Phillips

Postal voting - time to end a system open to fraud

2010-05-04T15:04:00.000-07:00

"Allegations of electoral fraud are being investigated in four Greater Manchester boroughs.

"Voters in Rochdale, north Manchester, Oldham and Bolton have all complained to police about alleged breaches of the electoral code of practice."

You can read the whole BBC story here.

Respect have long argued that the postal voting system is wide open to fraud. We regularly meet people who say someone had come to their house asking for their postal votes. On Thursday 6th May most people will make their way to the polling stations to cats their votes, in secret, for the candidate of their choice. That is the way it should be. Your vote, your choice. In secret.

Respect believe that democracy is too important to allow parties and individuals to steal votes. It's time that postal voting on demand was abolished and only people too ill, infirm or abroad at the time of the election should be able to apply for a postal vote.

Kersal celebrates the Chartists

2010-05-04T01:55:00.000-07:00

"I had the pleasure today, after a morning of canvassing, to attend the unveiling of a memorial, on Kersal Moor, Salford, to one of the high points of the Chartist movement.
"During 1838-1839, Kersal Moor was the site of the biggest demonstrations that this country had ever seen, as the Chartist movement mobilised demanding the right to vote.

"Thank you to the friends of Kersal Moor for arranging this, especially to one of the driving forces behind today's commemoration, my fellow Respect candidate, Alice Searle, dressed yesterday, appropriately as a suffragette. A movement that was also born in Manchester at the end of the 19th Century. Alice is standing in the Kersal Ward

"We owe our democratic rights today to the actions of the Chartist and Suffragettes of the past.

"I can't help thinking that if the same events of the past were happening today, the leaders of the 3 main parties would be running in the opposite direction "

The new plaque celebrating the Chartists on Kersal Moor

The Salford Star stall - Salford's wonderful community magazine

Old parties' deficit sums don't add up

2010-05-03T14:29:00.000-07:00

Despite them refusing to say where the axe will fall, all the three old parties still insist we've got to cut, cut and cut some more to reduce the national debt. Yet take a look at the graph. It shows the proportion of national debt to gross domestic product (GDP - the value of all the goods, services and raw materials produced in Britain each year).

If shows how ridiculous is the insistence of all the establishment parties on cutting the national debt and risking a deeper recession that could cost millions their jobs, homes and services. National debt was higher than it is now (as a proportion of GDP) throughout the period 1917 to 1969. In 1945 the national debt stood at over 200% of GDP, compared to 69% now. Yet from 1945 onwards we build a quarter of a million council houses every year, create the NHS and send our students to university for free - and with a grant.

We don't need cuts, we need investment - and a vote for Respect is the best way of getting it.

Last few days - Help elect Respect

2010-05-03T13:52:00.000-07:00

Tuesday 4th May
Meeting @ Respect Campaign Stall. Corner of Esmond Rd /Cheetham Hill Rd
Respect activities starting at 11.00am, 1.00pm, 4.00pm & 6.00pm

Wednesday 5th May
Meeting @ Respect Campaign Stall. Corner of Esmond Rd /Cheetham Hill Rd
Respect activities starting at 11.00am, 1.00pm, 4.00pm & 6.00pm

Thursday 6th May - Polling Day
Meeting @ Respect Campaign Stall. Corner of Esmond Rd /Cheetham Hill Rd
Respect activities start from 10.00am onwards.

MEN reports on Manifesto launch

2010-04-27T10:37:00.000-07:00

"The Respect party have launched their manifesto. They sent a delegation to the MEN offices yesterday to make sure we didn’t miss it.

"Their policies include protecting public-sector jobs, the immediate end of military action in Iraq, taking more public services into public ownership, replacing VAT with direct taxation, and a fully proportional voting system."

Read David Otwell's election blog report here

Manchester Respect launches Manifesto

2010-04-26T13:50:00.001-07:00

"Respect have set out their conditions for supporting a Labour government in a hung Parliament.

"As they launched their manifesto the party said they would not back a Tory government "under any circumstances".

"But they would support Labour if troops were withdrawn from Afghanistan, more council houses were built, there was electoral reform and an end to cuts.

"The anti-war party is hoping to gain up to three MPs on 6 May, which could leave it holding the balance of power."
BBC report on Greater Manchester Manifesto Launch - see full story here including video of Dr Kay Phillips, Respect's National Chair.
Brian Wheeler's Manifesto Watch - read story here
LONDON LAUNCH with George Galloway - Tuesday 27th April

You can download the full manifesto here

Laugh? I almost voted!

2010-04-25T23:33:00.000-07:00

A great night was had by all at the Laugh, I almost Voted benefit for Respect, Greens and TUSC/Hazel Must Go campaigns on Sunday night. A big thank you to all the acts - Mark Steel, Lewis Costello, Katie McCabe, Matt Green, Andrew Ryan, Joe Lysett, Rosie Phillips and Jack Williamson who made us laugh, to the Dancehouse Theatre for hosting the event, and to all the people who came, had a good laugh and put a few bob in the campaign coffers.

Make this election truly historic in Blackley and Brougton

2010-04-23T16:27:00.000-07:00

With just two weeks to go until polling day, Respect is out and about campaigning for peace, justice and equality. We have a powerful message but still too few of know about what we stand for. Had George Galloway or Salma Yaqoob gone up against the old three party leaders, I'm convinced that it wouldn't be Nick Clegg the country was talking about. So in the absence of media attention it's down to our supporters to do what they can to argue for Investment not Cuts in this election

If you can help out this weekend and into next week, we love to welcome you.

Sunday 25th April
Fundraiser event with Mark Steel, starts 7pm The Dancehouse Theatre, Oxford Rd, Tickets £10, (Tickets will be available on the door)

Monday 26th April
Respect Manifesto launch
11am Friends Meeting House, Mount Street, City Centre

Canvassing
Canvassing will take place every day from Monday 26th April, starting from around 10am. Contact Kay on 07901 821 702 if you want to join in.

Are you mobile - can you offer your car and time
We are looking for a mobile campaign team to tour the constituency putting up posters in shops. Contact Richard on 07760 224 580 if you want to volunteer for this job

Polish language posters
We have produced Vote Respect posters in Polish. If you want some to take some to your local Polish shop, contact Richard on 07760 224 580

Blackley and Broughton Council Ward elections
If you want to help out on any of the Council Ward campaigns contact the candidates below

Crumpsall. Contact: Mudz 079769 75512
Higher Blackley: Contact Paul on 0788 790 3616
Kersal . Contact: Alice on 07896 593 813

Mark Steel: Laugh? I almost voted!

2010-03-23T15:06:00.000-07:00

Tickets £10.00
www.thedancehouse.co.uk

TICKETS STILL AVAILABLE
PLEASE BUY ON THE DOOR ON SUNDAY EVENING
An evening with Mark Steel and friends is hosted by the Greater Manchester Respect Party. Proceeds to:
Kay Phillips (Respect Party - Blackley and Broughton) www.kayphillips.org
Gayle O’Donovan (Green Party - Manchester Central) gayleodonovan.blogspot.com
David Henry (Hazel Must Go / TUSC - Salford and Eccles) www.davidhenry.org.uk

Election meets Alice in Wonderland

2010-04-20T15:49:00.000-07:00

For all the hype and hysteria of the pundits, last week’s ‘great debate’ was largely a sterile affair. As all three parties have already committed themselves to ‘savage’ cuts in public services (largely unspecified until ‘next year’), for much of the hour and a half of ‘debate’ there was little new to be learnt from Tweedle Dee and his arch enemies Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber. However several things stood out.

Every poll suggests that Nick Clegg, Liberal Democrat came out on top. This is apparently due to his ‘fresh’ or ‘revelatory’ performance or media skills. Perhaps this misses the point. In policy, Clegg made some effort to place himself to the left of Brown and Cameron. He called for scrapping Trident and ID cards and a permanent tax on bank profits. Maybe he grasped that millions are looking for progressive change?

What about David Cameron, Tory boy? Largely he seemed to have ditched the Blair-style caring sharing compassion. Thatcher was back – more prison sentences, more tax cuts (for the rich), less (black and brown) immigrants. Yet even he scored points by attacking this year’s 7% pay rise for NHS bosses on six-figure salaries.

That Toryboy could outflank Gordon Brown by attacking fat cats (albeit only the public sector variety) shows the dead end New Labour has reached. Opinion polls show a majority opposed to slashing public services, a majorityagainst the pointless war in Afghanistan. Millions hate seeing the bankers and their mates in the City get away with robbery. Yet New Labour is unwilling to even hint at policies with genuine support.

This is why a hung parliament or a Tory government is the most likely outcome of the general election. It also explains the possibility of a very low turnout. Labour won in 1997 with a landslide and has left voters without any enthusiasm for any of three old parties. The stench of the expenses scandal and the distrust that grew from it continues to haunt British politics.

Given that the media has bought into it, those of us opposing the agreement for public service cuts on show yesterday will find it very hard to challenge on a national level. Locally we are having an impact and from here we can construct a national challenge.

This election feels like a shadow of what is to come. A potentially huge audience exists for investment not cuts – the question is how it expresses itself in this election and afterwards.

Polish migrants are welcome

2010-04-19T14:19:00.000-07:00

When the A8 countries of Eastern Europe joined the EU in 2004, large numbers of Polish people flocked to Britain. Behind the history of that migration and those connections lies a common shared experience dating back to WW2. This is when the Polish government was in exile in the UK, and tens of thousands of Poles fought alongside Britain - in the Army, Navy and in special Polish RAF squadrons.

Many Poles settled in the UK after the war.

The Polish Social Club on Cheetham Hill Rd is one expression on our shared history of that time.

From 2004 Polish people were welcome to the UK to join in the boom times of the UK economy. They were praised as hard working and industrious, and brought sorely need skills which helped the UK prosper.

Now, in this time of recession, there's a different tune is being sung . Poles are now being blamed for taking jobs and they are suffering a rising tide of racism. This is unacceptable, and ugly turn of events.

Its not Polish people that should be blamed for the problems of the economy. It's the bankers at the top and the employers who pay poverty wages and use the divide and rule tactics to set one group of workers against another that should be held to account.

We have much to learn from Polish history. Its was Polish workers who helped lead the great union drives in the US in the 1930s. Polish people built the world's biggest trade union in Solidarność. .

Respect stands by our Polish communities. Their contribution to our society - economically and culturally - enriches us all. We should cherish this. That's what I call Solidarity / Solidarność

Kay Phillips backs Liberty's Asylum Pledge

2010-04-17T10:42:00.000-07:00

In the run up to the election, Liberty, Refugee Council and Scottish Refugee Council are calling on all parliamentary candidates to sign our asylum election pledge and remember Britain’s history as a place of refuge for the persecuted.

Dr Kay Phillips has wholeheartedly backed the election pledge which is reproduced below.

Asylum Election Pledge

“There is no place for racism and xenophobia in modern British politics. Nor is democratic debate advanced by the denigration of the most vulnerable in our country, including children and asylum seekers who do not enjoy the right to participate in elections.

"I promise to remember the importance of refugee protection, even in free and wide-ranging debates about immigration policy. I will never play fast and loose with the proud tradition of a nation that must always offer succour to those in genuine fear of persecution.”

For peace and civil liberties

2010-04-13T10:21:00.000-07:00

The Stop the War Coalition is asking voters to lobby prospective candidates to find out their opinions on some of the great issues of the day - from Trident to Afghanistan. As a supporter of the Coalition, from its beginnings in the days after the atrocity on September 11th 2001, I'm happy to give my answers. I'm wholeheartedly for peace, against nuclear weapons and the demonisation of Britain's Muslim community and fully in support of defending our hard-won civil liberties.

In answer to the 7 Stop the War Coalition questions:

1. Do you support the immediate withdrawal of British and NATO troops from Afghanistan? Yes
2. Did you support the war in Iraq? No
3. Will you oppose any military attack on Iran by the United States or Israel? Yes
4. Do you support the immediate closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison? Yes
5. Are you opposed to the renewal of Trident nuclear weapons? Yes
6. Do you oppose the attacks on Muslims and the growing Islamophobia in British society? Yes
7. Do you agree that the use of anti-terrorist laws to restrict the right of protest is an attack on civil liberties? Yes