Nick Matthews: a Black Country Bloke @ Large

Move Your Money

2012-02-10T03:50:00.000-08:00

The noise about Fred ‘the shred’s’ Knighthood and Stephen Hester’s bonus is to distract us with a few high profile scapegoats whilst the rest of the banking cleptocracy get away with it. Moves by Cameron and Osborne to cover up their lack of action.

So what can we do about it? Well I was pleased that Co-operatives UK supported the UK Uncut inspired campaign MOVE YOUR MONEY. This campaign encourages people to close their accounts with the big banks and to move to more ethical financial institutions.

I must admit I have been thinking about this for a while a couple of years ago I sent some cash to Unite Against Fascism because of my concern about the EDL. Last year they wrote asking if I would consider donating again enclosing a direct debit form. Now the cash would have gone to HSBC. Interesting I thought so I wrote to them enclosing a cheque from my Smile account with the Co-op Bank and asked why HSBC? Maybe I had missed it but I had not seen them as partners in the struggle against Fascism.

I know that people are more likely to get divorced than change banks but it really is quite simple. I have just changed a £7 million account of a school where I am treasurer to the Co-op and it could not have been easier. Yet there are still people who claim to want to change the world but can’t summon up the energy to change their bank account.

I am sure like me you are sick of the behaviour of the main Banks. How many reasons do you need to shift your cash, the 2008 crash was all down to these people, the money they made from miss-selling and over charging and the continuing issue of bonus’s which distort the Banks activities and are an affront to any sense of decency.

Of course these Banks are not stupid and they will fight to keep our accounts. It is worth remembering that the demutualisation of building societies and insurance businesses that was supported and campaigned for by the banking sector in the late 1980s lead to the withdrawal of around 70% of the assets from the mutual building society and insurance sectors.

It has taken thirty years for the sector to rebuild itself addressing areas where the mainstream financial institutions have failed. Today they are growing rapidly, focusing on a mix of meeting needs not met by mainstream banks, value for money and social responsibility.

Today across the country there are 465 credit unions serving 870,000 members holding £600 million in savings, the building societies have £220 billion of UK savings. And since the credit crunch, The Co-operative Bank has been named by the Financial Times as the world's most sustainable bank, while Nationwide Building Society has been listed by Global Finance Magazine one of the world's safest financial institutions.

If the UK Move Your Money campaign only gets us to the penetration of co-op banks on the continent it would make a huge difference. In the Netherlands, half the population is with the highly successful co-operative Rabobank, while in Germany co-operative banks have 30 million members and Credit Agricole France’s largest Bank is owned by 6 million members with 54 million customers world- wide. Overall, European co-operative banks have 20% of the market but with a push it could be more.

We are soon to move into the Bank reporting season last year the level of bonuses was obscured during the furore about the News of the World and phone hacking, as the press likes nothing more than to report on a story about itself. The bank bonus figure for 2011 was £14 billion. Yes £14 billion in bonuses and these are on top of already hugely inflated salaries.

Despite the clap trap about ‘Project Merlin’ lending to small firms is continuing to fall and the management of most of the Banks today are getting their bonuses not for growing their businesses but for shrinking them! For calling in loans and overdrafts now deemed to be too risky and shedding staff.

When Adair Turner head of the FSA described the banks as “socially useless” he was obviously wrong. They do have a socially useful function. That of transferring wealth from the poor to the rich! (Useful of course only if you happen to be one of the rich).

Turner qualified his statement in a speech to the Cass Business School he said he should have used the term ‘economically useless’ or ‘of no economic value added’. Saying he wanted to “be confident that the impact of their activities will be beneficial for the real economy and thus for human welfare.”

Now it is crystal clear that the current banking system is unfit for purpose damaging to the real economy and therefore human welfare the government is not going to do anything so it is up to you. So why let them get their hands on any of your money?

I appreciate this is not the perfect solution but whilst we are waiting for perfection at least they are not paying themselves with your cash. What are you waiting for go to: moveyourmoney.org.uk

Time for a Moratorium on the Use of “John Lewis Model”!

2012-01-30T06:29:00.000-08:00

It is getting to the point that every time I hear a Tory or Liberal (or for that matter a New Labour) politician use the term “John Lewis Model” I want to scream! Never in the history of political discourse has a term been so misused by so many, so often!

Yet even I as a student and teacher of co-operation and co-operative business forms I have no idea what this all encompassing “John Lewis Model” as used by politicians’ is.

It is clearly from the way this phrase is used that the user is banking on the hearer having some vague well meaning niceness come to mind. A sort of warm organic Duchy Original waitrosian ambrosia from our one of our own farms.

Of course we are all familiar with the technique from our child hood readings of that political classic Alice Through the Looking Glass.
“When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”'
“The question is”' said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

“The question is,”' said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that's all.”
Well this week its Nick Clegg’s turn to be master. He wants the “John Lewis Model” to “do something” about corporate governance in the UK and at the same time improve labour productivity.

How interesting. And how does he intend this to work. Apparently by allowing workers to ask for shares. Now that too sounds familiar but I am not sure that Nick has read the right book this time as this is more Oliver Twist than Alice Through the Looking Glass. “Please Sir, Can I have some more?”
You would be amazed at how many problems the “John Lewis Model” can solve. A Google search gave me 135,000 references in 25 seconds.
It is going to solve all our problems in funding the public sector, empower people, giving people control of community centre, libraries, swimming pools, schools, etc etc. Once the “John Lewis Model” takes hold it will be like the second coming. All the bosses will be kind and all the workers will be grateful.
All will be well in the world there will be no capitalists and the purpose of all economic organisation will be to make workers happy. Oh happy days!

But wait a moment have all these politicians really understood what dear old John Spedan Lewis actually did? He did not give workers a smattering of shares, or having sacked them offered them the chance to compete from a position on the pavement. Talk of the “John Lewis Model” in the NHS is particularly pernicious as if the NHS are going to give their staff a hospital and all the equipment that goes with it!

No John Spedan Lewis actually gave them the whole company - all of it - every shop, office and warehouse.

The whole business is owned in Trust for the workers and they have a complex but nonetheless a real form of democratic control over the business.

Is this really what Tory and Liberal politicians are advocating – interestingly New Labour types only began advocating “John Lewis models” and eulogising co-operation generally either just as they are about to leave or just after having left office like a form of radical chic.

Are they really advocating giving the entire NHS to the people who work in it under a form of workers control with the sole purpose of running it to make those self same workers happy?

And are they advocating buying all the shares in BP then giving them to the workers setting up an international workers BP parliament and encouraging the workers to run the oil giant solely to make them happy?

It is worth remembering that John Spedan Lewis set up the Partnership in 1929 not from a fit of philanthropy but from a fit of anti-communism. He gave the firm to the workers because ultimately he was frightened, as he saw it, of something far worse.
That fear of something worse is exactly what drives the Tories and Liberals today they throw sand in our eyes with talk of the blessed “John Lewis Model” because they have no interest in giving workers their due and they merely want to put workers off taking that which already belongs to them.

In the public sector they are trying to sell to workers what they already own and in the private offer a few crumbs from the top table. We saw with the sale of Northern Rock to Virgin Money that the government have no interest whatsoever in co-operatives, or mutual’s, worker or otherwise.

The fact is if we want workers control and more co-operative ownership we will have to do it for ourselves. Of course John Lewis and other workers co-ops are a good thing so are other co-operative forms and workers would be acting in their own interests by joining and forming co-ops, investing and shopping with them, for everything from food, to telecoms, to energy and anything else they feel they need and goodness me Britain needs a bigger co-operative sector. But there are no short cuts; this kind of philanthropic giveaway is the exception not the rule no one is going to give workers anything.

So the next time you hear a coalition politician going on about the “John Lewis model” remember in their hands this model has less life in it than one of the dummies in the windows of John Lewis’s Oxford Street store!

Consumer Co-op's in Japan

2012-01-17T04:53:00.000-08:00

Towards Contemporary Co-operative Studies: Perspectives from Japan’s Consumer Co-ops. Edited and Published in 2010, by The Consumer Co-operative Institute of Japan. 15, Rokubancho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0085 Japan.
ISBN: 978-4-915307-00-3.

A Review by Nick Matthews

The Japanese consumer co-operative sector deserve great credit for establishing the Consumer Co-operative Institute (CCIJ) and then for allowing it such a wide ranging brief to look at the future of consumer co-operation in Japan. In an excellent piece of work the CCIJ has conducted, “comprehensive multidisciplinary studies on consumer life, consumer co-ops and civil society by involving both researchers and practitioners.” Something the UK Society for Co-operative Studies aims at and has been set a benchmark by this study.

The sector is an important actor in the Japanese economy with nearly 40% of Japanese households belonging to a consumer co-op generating a turnover of around Three Trillion Yen (at the time of writing there where 76 Yen to the US$).

The latter half of the nineteen nineties saw the stunning growth of the sector in Japan stagnate the growing realisation that they faced a new set of problems and challenges was the stimulus for the development of Consumer Co-op Studies.

There was also a deep realisation that the changes in Japanese society are not unique - so I am delighted that this work has been published in English – and that a new kind of research was needed “transcending the framework of the existing body of research, to deal not only with the organisation and management of the consumer co-ops, but also the various external conditions influencing them.”

This research covers four main areas, firstly the organisation and management of consumer co-op’s, secondly and perhaps more innovatively, an analysis of “changes in consumers lives in relation to consumer co-ops”, thirdly to understand the role of changes life style and in society generally that are driven by globalisation and the information society and fourthly, and the most far reaching, to “draw up a vision for a new communal society in the 21st century.”

They argue that, “consumer lives will be stabilised and the basis of democratic participation will be secured, when consumers voluntarily set up strong community organisations for the improvement of life and welfare.”

The book tackles these issues in three parts, in the first part Japanese Consumer Co-ops Today and Tomorrow, there are some fascinating insights into Japanese consumer co-operation. Japan was an early adopter of the “Rochdale model” with the first co-op shops opening in Tokyo and Osaka in 1879. In the early day’s three different types of co-ops developed, ones attached to companies for their employees, worker-orientated co-ops associated with the radical labour movement and citizens co-ops organised by the middle classes. However the Second World War almost completely destroyed these societies leading to a fresh start in the 1940’s.

Whilst the leadership came from the pre-war movement the post-war consumer co-op movement was based on necessity as the economy was in a state of near collapse. Co-ops in the form of buying groups mushroomed but as the economy stabilised and began to grow this movement, lacking effective management and organisation, was unsustainable. In the 1950’s growing trade unions took on supporting “workers welfare businesses” to supplement their main role of collective bargaining. Local Trade Councils began to set up co-op shops again this was relatively short lived as they faced stiff competition from the new supermarket formats introduced by existing retailers.

The transformation in the movement came with the development of “Citizen Co-ops” these where partly a reaction against the industrialisation of foodstuffs from Japanese housewives. Indeed this is probably the most distinctive feature of Japanese Consumer Co-ops – the active participation of women members.

The key unit of organisation was the Han group, traditionally they where small groups of women in a neighbourhood who came together to channel their opinions into the co-op. A third of the total co-op members belonged to Han groups although the average group size was only four members. The second key feature was home delivery – something that has gone in, out and back into fashion here in the west.

Akira Kurimoto, points out that “Joint buying is a unique system of home delivery to Han groups, in which members place joint weekly orders to co-op delivery staff who then deliver the food and groceries the following week.” Akira is Director and Chief Researcher of the Consumer Co-op Institute and also Executive Director of the Robert Owen Association.

The big issue for Han customers was primarily food safety many Japanese consumers where concerned about food safety and demanded produce free of additives, pesticides and any form of adulteration. This particularly appealed to those living in the new suburbs which often lacked the range of shops consumers wanted.

Members demands where quickly communicated and acted on by managers thereby strengthening customer loyal. By law all customers had to be members so a strong pattern of member involvement from the Han groups to district committees, consumer panels’ up to annual meetings and boards developed.

Also being restricted in their trading areas and restrictions on advertising to the general public forced them to be very close to their members and the communities they served. By the way it is clear from this book that the Japanese know a great deal more about European consumer co-op’s than we do about Japanese ones and seeing ourselves through Japanese eyes is not always flattering.

As a Director of a UK retail co-operative society I was particularly interested in Akira Kurimoto’s chapter on Consumer Co-ops Retail business operations. Like everywhere the retail co-ops are facing intense competition and there has been a downturn in the amount members have been buying from stores driving a consequent downturn in floor space and this trend seems set to continue. However to compensate they have established a dominant position in home delivery indeed individual home delivery seems to be replacing the Han groups.

It is only in the last decade that more intensive forms of federal buying and product development functions have developed and it is hoped this will improve the sectors competitiveness improving quality, product safety and prices.

Considering the debates we have in the UK in developing a consistent national co-operative brand another fascinating chapter is by Deborah Steinhoff who whilst based in the US received her PhD in Agricultural Economics from Hokkaido University and worked for many years for Coop Sapporo and who writes about the development of COOP brand merchandise.

The cornerstone of the COOP brand in Japan was and is the Japanese consumers’ anxiety about food safety and the ‘credibility’ of agricultural products after WWII.
Historically that anxiety was expressed through the Han groups – today the movement is harnessing internet technology to engage members in product development.

The way this anxiety was addressed is through a system known as Sanchoku. This is a sophisticated provenance system providing fresh foodstuffs directly from the producers based on three principles, traceability, standardisation and a direct line of communication between consumers and producers. As the distance between producers and consumers with the growth of more complex larger scale buying arrangements this system has come under some strain.

Despite this consumers still join primarily to buy COOP brand products. Indeed in surveys members say that they value security, safety and transparency as the key issues. These are followed by the fact that members support the concern the movement expresses for the less fortunate in society perhaps surprisingly price was of lesser importance.

The growth of co-op’s has gone along with educating members about food, as issues around food production, health, nutrition, and the environment have also gone into the development of the brand.

The second part of the book looks at the way consumer co-operation has diversified into two other areas, into what are called University Co-ops and Medical Co-ops. There are lessons again to be learned from how Japan has diversified into these areas for us in Europe. The University Co-ops are established on University campuses to supply, cafeterias, bookstores and other services to staff and students. There is perhaps more we can learn from the medial co-ops as the Japanese health care sector has some similarities to our own and the co-op sector offers a particular service.

They seek to challenge the ‘problems associated with asymmetric information’ and as such they are empowering consumers of heath care through “learning and participation and taking on the challenge to create networks for heath promotion and medical and social care in communities.”

The last part of the book looks at consumer co-operation in the wider Japanese economy and society, including the changing institutional framework of co-ops, their role in the Japanese food system, their role in civil society and the way they could play a role in ‘reconstructing the livelihood security system’.

This latter chapter by Professor Mari Osawa, of the Institute of Social Science of the Univesity of Tokyo, looks at unpicking the welfare state to look at welfare government and governance and how co-operative forms could drive participation in community management. These are particularly challenging ideas that deserve a much wider sounding than is possible in this review.

Overall this is a terrific publication which both articulates the issues and challenges facing the Japanese consumer co-operative movement and also offers some powerful insights that co-operators everywhere could learn from.

2012 A Special Year for Co-op's

2012-01-17T04:50:00.000-08:00

Everyone in the co-op movement was chuffed when the United Nations designated 2012 as the International Year of Co-operatives. Co-operation has been an international movement for a long time with the founding of the International Co-operative Alliance (ICA) in 1895.
Co-op’s where a key ingredient in the formation of the International Labour Organisation in 1919. The ILO, formed as part of the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I reflected the belief that peace could only be accomplished if based on social justice.
The first Director General of the ILO was French Co-operator Albert Thomas (ex- executive committee of the ICA) and the Co-op Branch of the ILO was established in 1920.
The 1920 Governing documents of the ILO say that “The Peace Treaty foresees that the ILO should not only be concerned with the conditions of work but also with the conditions of workers. By and large, it is under the organisational form of co-operatives that this concern is best addressed for the largest part of the population. The Co-operative Section will not limit itself to the questions of distribution, but will also research into the question of housing, leisure time of workers and transportation of the workforce etc.”
Sadly before this could be fulfilled the world was plunged into depression and world war. Following which international politics was blighted by the cold war. Unlike the International Trade Union Movement the ICA was not split by the cold war. Whilst this degree of unity was laudable the consequence was the organisation was to be largely ignored by the western dominated UN and it was unable to be firm about co-op’s being independent of the state until it ended.
It is only in modern times then that the ILO and UN have rediscovered the importance of Co-ops to social justice and the global economy. It may be hard to believe but the contemporary global Co-op sector secures the livelihoods of three billion people. There are a billion owner members of co-ops and they directly employ over 100 million workers.
To put this in perspective that is twenty percent more than all the transnational corporations added together. There are also three times as many member owners of co-operatives as there are shareholders in capitalist businesses, as there are only 328 million people who own company shares.
I celebrated the launch of the international year at Birmingham Film Co-op one of many new co-op’s that have sprung up to fill the gap in the market for the distribution of radical films.
The film was The Take. It follows thirty unemployed car-parts workers in Buenos Aires during Argentina’s economic collapse of 2001. They march into their idle factory, roll out sleeping bags and refuse to leave. All they want is to re-start the silent machines, armed only with an abiding faith in shop-floor democracy they face off the bosses, bankers and a system that sees their factory as scrap. What shines through the film, directed by Canadian journalist Avi Lewis and writer Naomi Klein, is the simple drama of the workers struggle for dignity. Importantly this is not just another tale of heroic failure.
Over a decade after the campaign - ‘Resist, Occupy, Produce’ - the Argentine recovered factories movement began there are still 300 factories that have survived as workers co-ops. But co-op’s are not just acts of desperation by workers or small social clubs for radical film goers.
The top 300 co-op enterprises worldwide have a turnover of US$ 1.6 trillion. This - a bigger economy than Spain - is a significant sector in any language and if anything despite being the home of modern co-operation the UK has a lot of lost ground to make up. In Europe, three countries have over half of their population in co-operative membership – Ireland is top with 70%, then Finland at 60% and Austria at 59%. Other countries with the high proportions of people in co-operative ownership are India with 242million and China with 160million. Even the land of free enterprise the USA has a higher proportion than the UK with 120million co-op members.
It was good to see former Labour MEP Pauline Green, now President of the ICA speaking to the UN General Assembly to launch the year in New York where she called for countries globally to provide co-operatives with a “level playing field”.
She said the unique legal and financial framework of co-operatives should be fully recognized in public policy and regulation saying “Co-operatives are asking for their model of business to be given equal promotion with the shareholder model. The diversity and robustness of the co-operative business model is based on principles and values. This is why co-operatives were resilient during the global financial crisis, employing over 100 million people worldwide and enabling the development and welfare of societies in the most competitive economies.”
The strap line for the UN year is, Co-operative Enterprises build a better world. Whilst I am sure that is true, given the state of the UK economy, the crying need is for more co-operation here!

Bradlaugh contra Marx

2011-12-13T05:46:00.000-08:00

Book Review by Nick Matthews

Bradlaugh contra Marx, Radicalism versus Socialism in the First International.

Published by the Socialist History Society, Occasional Publication No 28.
86 pages £4.00

This is a short quite delightful monograph published by the Socialist History Society (the successor organisation to the Communist History Group) and written by playwright and society member Deborah Lavin. It is a well researched paper about the tussles between Karl Marx and Charles Bradlaugh in the workings of the International Working Mens Association. She seems to have discovered details of this interesting tussle whilst working on her biography of Dr Edward Aveling the partner of Karl Marx’s daughter Eleanor.

The journey through the exile organisations of late nineteenth century politics are reminiscent of Joseph Conrad’s Secret Agent or of in the case of Bradlaugh, who she virtually accuses of being an agent provocateur, G.K. Chesterton’s the Man who was Thursday.

In Lavin’s hands neither Marx nor Bradlaugh come out of this episode very well. Marx comes across as an arrogant, sectarian whilst Bradlaugh comes across as an opportunist, charlatan. In one critical episode, what she describes as the oaths question, she argues Bradlaughs battle over taking the Parliamentary oath, was not a matter of principal but merely a misunderstanding.

The six year struggle ending in the “Tories oaths Act of 1888 is generally credited as a Civil Rights victory for Bradlaugh, but as he only got entangled in the oaths question by accident, and the moment he was allowed, Bradluagh willingly swore allegiance to Queen Victoria on the Bible.”
She says that it is “quite erroneous to see Bradlaugh as playing the part of the heroic man of principle”. Equally to give Bradlaugh some credit, however, he was an extraordinarily good public speaker, something Marx could never be accused of, and was also an extremely tenacious campaigner.

Lavin is clearly more sympathetic to Marx and he was clearly successful in keeping the mere Liberal Bradlaugh out of the IWMA but ultimately he kept everyone else out of it too by moving its HQ to New York ostensibly to escape the anarchist Michael Bakunin.

Bradlaughs attempts to recreate a version of the IWMA under a new name the International Labour Union also failed. Bradlaughs effort to court the newly rising working class however does show their emerging importance in Liberal politics.

There is much in this wonderful monograph, very rich in references, that would repay careful reading but it does highlight two obvious things. Firstly there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. How any of the organisations portrayed in this paper could have lasted more than a second or had any lasting influence is astonishing. And secondly it does not pay to look too closely at ones heroes as their feet are undoubtedly made of clay as they too are mere flesh and blood and subject to the same vanities and needs as the rest of us.

Histories of Labour

2011-12-08T07:55:00.000-08:00

Histories of Labour, National and International Perspectives, Edited by John McIlroy, Alan Campbell & Joan Allen, Merlin Press, 2010, ISBN 978085036677.

a review by Nick Matthews

I greatly enjoyed this book although I would not recommend reading it in a single sitting. There is a lot to take in and numerous changes in perspective to accommodate. When I was young I could never understand why people kept writing new books about the same period in history. Now I am a bit like the person in the Bob Dylan song who was “so much older then” but is “younger than that now”!

It requires perspective and some distance to understand the real significance of events and this collection of essays does that in spades. Interestingly the event it both commemorates and celebrates is the birth of the Society for the Study of Labour History. The editors say, “Histories of Labour, which documents the development of the subject in a variety of countries around the world, is published to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the Society for the Study of Labour History (SSLH), its organised expression in Britain”.

In the introduction Eric Hobsbawm explains how this seminal event occurred and how the idea of the Society “came from the collective of friends formed in the Communist Party Historians’ Group.” At the height of the cold war even Hobsbawn was finding it hard to get published, difficult to believe now given his status as a ‘national treasure’ and the Order of Merit.

The man chosen to front this new Society was Asa Briggs then easily the most established academic historian with a record of work in the field. What exactly this field is over fifty years and numerous changes in historiography I found more difficult to pin down. The best definition occurs in the final essay of the book by Marcel van der Linden, Research Director of the International Institute of Social History and Professor of Social Movement History at the University of Amsterdam;

“The term ‘labour history’ has a dual meaning. Strictly speaking the concept refers to the history of the labour movement: parties, trade unions, cooperatives, strikes and related phenomena. More broadly interpreted, the concept denotes the history of the working classes: the development of labour relations, family life, mentalities, culture. This ambiguity seems characteristic of the term in English. In many other languages labour movement history and working-class history cannot be summed up in a single term.”

By the time I got to this final chapter having worried at this ambiguity throughout the book I was glad to see it confirmed. Van der Linden, continues that both this ‘broad’ and ‘narrow’ Labour History have their origins in the North Atlantic region so it is good to see the impact that this school of thought, if that is not too strong a term, has had internationally.

There are fascinating essays in this book from India and Japan, where both labour history and Labour History have taken significantly different turns. Although there appear to be two threads that echo across the world, the first is the enormous impact of Edward Thompsons the making of the English Working Class. Van der Linden again,

“In the 1960’s we see the beginnings of the so called ‘new labour history’, with E.P.Thomson’s The Making of the English Working Class as a landmark publication. This great book, by emphasizing culture and consciousness, integrated broad and narrow labour history, once its message was assimilated.”

Of course this transition can be exaggerated but I do not think it would be inaccurate to argue that almost all Labour History since has been a dialogue with this great work. Who, having read it, can forget that wonderful preface written in Halifax in 1962 and Thompsons hope that he was,

“seeking to rescue the poor stockinger, the Luddite cropper, the “obsolete” hand-loom weaver, the “utopian” artisan, and even the deluded follower of Joanna Southcott from the enormous condescension of posterity.”

He did something else too I think and that is break the almost Whiggish nature of much so called Marxist writing of Labour History which saw the continuous march of organised labour to state power as inevitable. Whilst nothing could have been more literally English about Thomson’s work it had a huge international impact which is reflected in this book.

In his essay, Organised Labour History in Britain, John McIlroy, points out that;

“It was said of Thompson that he ‘opened new ways of enquiring into the past in India and Latin America,[…] He has influenced Chinese labour historians and inspired the feminist scholar of Arab texts, Fatima Mernissi.’ He lectured in Canada and the USA and maintained his family’s links with India. His influence marked the developments in labour history in all three countries.”

This canonisation of Thompson is not to diminish the work of other scholars but it does point up the huge contribution to both broad and narrow Labour History from those outside the academy and the fact that institutionalised university history has never been quite sure what to do with the history of the lower orders.

The second thread is that well before the forward march of labour was halted in Eric Hobsbawms immortal phrase the subject matter had begun to fragment with new dimensions to the central ambiguity. Some of these especially the interest of feminists has been very welcome others like the so called ‘linguistic turn’ less so.

Hobsbawm suspects that what made British Labour history influential however, apart from the sheer size of the community and the high quality of some of the work produced was “its function as a catalyst of political rethinking on the British left”.

“Neither E.P. Thompson’s Making or Raph Samuels initiatives, the ‘History Workshop’ movement , nor my Primitive Rebels , can be fully understood accept as an attempt to find a way forward in left politics through historical reflection.”

Anyone interested in Labour History will find terrific value in this book I found references to works that I was not familiar with that I will now seek out to fill gaps in my understanding and readers will gain huge benefits from the references and bibliography. I particularly welcome the opportunity to look at Labour History through the prism of the Indian, Japanese and German experience which these international essays give us.

If I have one disappointment it is that although Van der Lindon mentions co-operation in his definition (and as a co-operator) I found only one reference in the index to Co-operation and that is in the context of the Canadian Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. Clearly there is work still to be done and I hope the next fifty years of organised labour history are as rich as the first fifty and we will continue to look for ways forward in left thinking with active historical reflection.

Nick Matthews is the Chair of the UK Society for Co-operative Studies

NORTHERN WRECK

2011-12-08T07:51:00.000-08:00

I was surprised when Tory rhetoric went from “No such thing as Society” to the “Big Society” and even more surprised about their new found passion for co-operatives and mutual’s. Well we can all now see that it was purely cosmetic. The coalition has fallen at the very first fence. The first chance the Coalition gets to turn the rhetoric into action about creating co-ops and new mutual’s and they sell Northern Rock to of all people Richard Branson.

As Ed Mayo general secretary of Co-operatives UK said “The government had a real chance to show the strength of its commitment to co-operatives and mutuals….it passed it up”. The winner is the people’s capitalist and self publicist par excellence Richard Branson.

This is the man who made his first pile from the Exorcist. A film that like the Coalition was pretty scary. Every time we went towards that room we heard the music of Mike Oldfield’s Tubular Bells. Released as single in America on the Virgin label it became a top ten hit. The success of the film drove the sales of the album, until then an underground success, and made it the first hit on Branson’s Virgin records – a hit that made a fortune for Oldfield and for Branson.

Tom Bower wrote a wonderful biography of Branson, a book which had this glowing endorsement from its subject, “What I have read has offended me on every single level ... it is a foul, foul piece of work from the first words to the last - really rotten, nasty stuff.” In the book Bower points out that, “Virgin Music - started amid a sophisticated purchase-tax fraud that Branson admitted in 1971 - was sold in 1992 for a record £560m”. The money was used to found an airline Virgin Atlantic (which is now 49% owned by Singapore airlines) created when the government stripped BA of landing slots at Heathrow.

Since then Branson has been lending his Virgin brand name to various enterprises to give what are a set of fairly mediocre business a bit of hippy radical gloss as customers using any thing carrying the Virgin brand will tell you.

Most of the things he has launched in competitive markets have failed, Virgin, condoms, cola or vodka anyone and what happened to Virgin stores?

And there are Virgin trains (49% owned by Stagecoach) currently operating the West Coast franchise who used to be much bigger until they lost the cross-country franchise after lumbering it with the worst modern train fleet in Britain. Trains that are noisy, uncomfortable and unable to cope if passengers dare to turn up with luggage.

As with Virgin phones, Branson operates in protected markets. As Aditya Chakrabortty said in the Guardian, “the Virgin boss keeps himself in homes in Holland Park and Necker Island by taking taxpayers subsidies and operating in heavily protected businesses.”

Now he has written a book, called ‘Screw Business as Usual’ needless to say published by Virgin Books in it he talks about the “new capitalism”. He says that he has a new name for it, “Capitalism 24902” apparently because the circumference of the earth is 24,902 miles. Then you read in the Financial Times Branson’s chief investor in Northern Rock, American Financier Wilbur Ross saying, “We would hope to sell out a few years down the road.”

This sounds like business as usual to me. It is not the business that is being screwed it is the taxpayer. The Northern Counties Building Society founded in 1850 and the Rock Building Society in 1865 they survived two world wars and the great depression before merging in 1965 to form Northern Rock. Then it floated as a mortgage bank on 1st October 1997. Less than ten years later it in 2008 it was spectacularly bust!

Many commentators have pointed out that the £747 million price Branson is paying for Northern Rock means that every taxpayer in Britain is paying Branson £13 to take Northern Rock away. But this is not the full story. Branson is only buying the good part of Northern Rock. So far the Coalition has no plans to sell Northern Rock Asset Management or the so called Bad Bank.

In October 2010 Northern Rock (Asset Management) plc and that other busted bank and former building society Bradford & Bingley were integrated under a single holding company, UK Asset Resolution which has a plan that hopes to wind down the institutions in a way that repays a combined debt to the taxpayer of around £50billion.

There is no reason to think that this tiny mortgage bank can survive on its own with just 75 branches and investors would be wise to get out as soon as practically possible. None of the converted Building Societies have survived as Mortgage Banks because the model simply does not work.

That is why many people campaigned for the Rock to be remutualised to return to its roots as a provider of mortgages based on savers deposits. But no George Osborne has decided to make his own horror movie and once again the Virgin label is providing the soundtrack.

Somerset’s Co-op Champion

2011-11-24T03:55:00.000-08:00

Chewton Mendip, Coleford, East Harptree, Bradford-on-Avon, Frome, Trowbridge and Radstock names that sound like a stopping train journey with John Bejtemen on the pre-Beeching Somerset and Dorset railway.

What these places have in common is that until the 1970’s they all had their own retail co-operative societies. The exception in the list is the small Somerset town of Radstock a former mining village in the old Somerset coalfield. Not only does it still have an independent Co-operative Retail Society – it is thriving - with in 2011 gross sales topping £21million, a record £1.5 million trading surplus and is totally debt free.

In 1868 the early meetings to form the Radstcock Co-operative and Industrial Society took place in the towns Workingmen’s Hall. A temperance house, supported by the agent of the local coal owner Countess Waldegrave, this ensured that according to Society President and historian George Donkin, “those budding co-operators were not going to hang about”.

The society was formed by a mixed bunch drawn from the railways and agriculture as well as mining. One founder Septimus Kidd, who sounds like a character from a Dickens novel, was the head bailiff for the Waldegrave collieries.

At the end of the first year the 145 members enjoyed a dividend of one shilling and five pence in the pound - quite a useful sum at the time. As there where so many co-op societies in the surrounding villages up until the 1920’s rather than form branches they went into house building. Most of the sturdy terraces sold to members and staff are still standing today.

It was the new century, 1901, before the Society began to branch out, the first branch opened in High Littleton and branch thirteen in Midsummer Norton in 1913.

The Society had a close relationship with the mining community. In the 1912 mining dispute the Society lent a £1,000 to the Miners Association a considerable sum causing the Society some difficulty until it was repaid in 1913. The Society always supported local workers in difficulties including in 1920 the Boot and Shoe Operative Union and in 1921 the Miners and Enginemen’s Association was loaned £6,600 together with a donation of £160 to their distress fund.

The First World War saw many of the Societies workers conscripted. Ten men never returned a large number out of a staff of just 200 when the war started. The War saw the Societies first foray into farming, one it has maintained unlike most independent societies, right through to the present day.

In 1926 they were steadfast once again in supporting the miners. A loan of £10,300 was made to local miners unions and £515 donated to the distress fund as well as £210 in food vouchers from the Co-operative Union. Staff also expressed solidarity with the donation of a days pay to the relief fund. The 1930’s where very difficult in the coal mining areas Somerset was no exception but thanks to support from the Co-operative Wholesale Society they survived.

The Radstcock that people came back to after the Second World War was very different to those troubled inter war years and in modern times the Society has been able to survive as an independent society by being a good retailer.

In 1959 it made a huge investment in a new central store in Radstock. To outsiders this looked like not only putting the entire Society under one roof but putting the whole town of Radstock under one roof! It was a dynamic modernist style of building that would have looked more at home in post-war Coventry than in rural Somerset.
Despite any architectural misgivings for over fifty years as many of the branch stores closed this has been the anchor of the Society. In more recent times as well as totally refurbishing the superstore they have been once again been opening new branches growing from six to ten.
The Society's 1000 acre farm at Hardington on the outskirts of Frome also played its part after some very difficult trading conditions in the farming industry. Nowadays supermarket cheddar can come from anywhere in the world so here is a novelty, the milk from the farm goes to make Wyke Farm cheddar which supplies co-op stores across the country. Cheddar from Somerset who would believe it!
Today the Society is well grounded in its local communities and a staunch supporter of the Eat Somerset campaign being keen to support local suppliers by selling and showcasing their products which all helps to cut down on food miles.

Don Morris, CEO said, “We were really proud to gain the Social Enterprise Mark in 2010. We are committed to supporting local suppliers and helping our communities to thrive. We are determined to protect our independence so we can be responsive to local needs and react quickly to changing local conditions. We are not just in business to make money, but to serve our local communities."

At a meeting recently a friend whose wife owns a shop in Glastonbury that sells crystals and all sorts of new age stuff to those seeking the Arthurian experience said how delighted they where with the new Radstock Co-operative shop in the town.

So there you have it - at the end of the search for the Holy Grail is a Co-op shop.

Co-op Women and the White Peace Poppy.

2011-11-01T08:29:00.000-07:00

The other day I picked up a couple of white poppies with the word Peace boldly displayed at their centre. I wondered at this time of remembrance if people realise that the White Poppy was first launched by the Co-operative Women’s Guild back in 1933.

The Guild with a proud record in campaigning for a peace began with a small ad in the Co-op News of April 13th, 1883.

It read:
'The Women's League for the spread of co-operation has begun. All who wish to join should write their name and address to Mrs. Acland, Fyfield Road, Oxford.'

Mrs Ackland edited the papers women’s pages and from such humble beginnings one of the most important working class women’s organisations of the twentieth century was born. A year later it had a change of name to the Co-operative Women’s Guild and by 1910 had 32,000 members.

What began as vehicle to spread the ideas of retail co-operation soon took on the wider concerns of working women. It was Guild pressure that ensured maternity benefits where included in the 1911 National Insurance Act. The Guild campaigned tirelessly both nationally and internationally for minimum wages and maternity benefits.

In April 1914 they were involved in an International Women's Congress at The Hague which passed a resolution totally opposing war:
“this Conference is of opinion that the terrible method of war should never again be used to settle disputes between nations, and urge that a partnership of nations, with peace as its object, should be established and enforced by the people's will.”
What a pity that the men of Europe did not pay heed to their women! This was the beginning of the Guild's active peace work.

After the 1914-1918 war they sought to understand the social, political and economic conditions which gave rise to war and by 1921 their Congress called for the:
'Cessation of the provocative competition in armaments... revision of the Peace Treaties... purging politics and education of militarism in all its forms.... abolishing force as a remedy for social unrest.... eliminating private profit-making from the industrial system.'

In 1933 at its peak with a membership of 72,000 it launched the White Poppy as an alternative to the British Legions Red Poppy campaign. The red poppy had begun as a way of collecting funds for French war orphaned children and was taken over by the British Legion for the Haig Appeal. Many women who had lost husbands, brothers and sons in the First World War did not want to see Armistice Day used to make war acceptable.

Today of course when war is a matter of choice many people, particularly those in the media have no choice when it comes to the wearing of the red poppy and thereby inadvertently supporting war. No one is critical of those mourning lost loved ones but the theatrical use of the dead by politicians and the military as a justification for endless war lest their deaths be ‘in vain’ is despicable.

When we are not facing an existential threat it is more important than ever to remember all the victims of war. Sadly the number of civilians killed in wars, represented by the White Poppy, totally dwarfs the numbers of service personnel who are killed extending and defending “western interests”. In the First World War the overwhelming number of dead where combatant’s as warfare has evolved it is now largely fought by highly technologically equipped forces against civilians.
In the Iraq war less than 3,000 US service personnel died whilst according to the MIT Mortality Study the civilian death toll was over 650,000.

The fact we have to estimate the Iraqi dead because no cares enough to count them and record their names tells us why we should remember them. The White Poppy therefore has come to represent the true cost of modern warfare and those who are left out of the reckoning when it comes to the laying wreaths at the cenotaph.

The tradition of the White Poppy is kept alive today by the Peace Pledge Union founded by Canon Dick Shepperd. Dicks final appointment was at St Pauls cathedral so it obviously has a history of awkward priests. He was supported by notables such as the Methodist Donald Soper and Labour leader George Lansbury. The newly founded PPU joined with the Co-operative Women’s Guild in distributing the White Poppies and has done so ever since.

This year when Britain has been continuously at war for fifteen years the PPU will lay a wreath of white poppies at the Conscientious Objectors Memorial Stone in Tavistock Square on Remembrance Sunday at 12.30. They will be there to call for an end to war, to reflect on the misery caused by war and those who support it and be inspired by those individuals who have refused to take part in war whatever the consequences.

If you just want to obtain some White Poppies go to www.PPU.org.uk
The Co-op Women’s Guild hit the nail on the head back in 1921 there is still too much profit in war. Thankfully the Guild it is still going, still striving to make the world a better more co-operative place and now accepts individual membership see: www.cooperativewomensguild.coop

Peoples March for Jobs

2011-11-01T08:23:00.000-07:00

I was heavily involved along with many others at Wolves Poly in the Peoples March for Jobs back in 1983 and just as all that stuff comes back again it was sad to hear of the death of old Tiptonian Pete Carter.Here is his Obituary from the Guardian:

Pete Carter obituary

Union leader who fought for the rights of construction workers by Jon Bloomfield The Guardian, Tuesday 25 October 2011,

Pete Carter, who has died aged 73 of lung cancer, was an idealistic, imaginative and effective leader of the construction workers' trade union Ucatt. He looked beyond the traditional labour movement to build wider alliances, notably around environmental values. The union's Midlands organiser from 1980, he worked with three TUC regional councils to mobilise the People's March for Jobs the following year. It sought broad support for alternatives to the economic policies of Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government, and evoked memories of the Jarrow March of October 1936.

A group of 280 marchers left Liverpool at the start of May 1981, local groups supported them en route, feeder marches from Yorkshire and South Wales joined in, and by the end of the month 150,000 unemployed people and trade unionists converged on Hyde Park in central London for a final rally. Pete was again to the fore when the Scottish TUC, Wales TUC and regional councils set about planning a second march in 1983, this time starting from Glasgow and involving a wider range of localities.

Public campaigning and winning new allies were Pete's strengths. He was less comfortable with the political in-fighting that he had to endure from 1984 as the Communist party of Great Britain's industrial organiser. Immediately he had to deal with Arthur Scargill's disastrous leadership of the miners' strike of 1984-85. When it was over, Pete and the CPGB's general secretary, Gordon McLennan, met to discuss how unity could be preserved among the miners with Scargill and Mick McGahey, and a furious row ensued.

By then, the civil war between the CPGB's eurocommunist and traditionalist wings had grown too deep to resolve. This made it impossible for Pete to transform labour-movement politics in the campaigning directions that he had envisaged, and in 1991 the party broke up. Pete returned to the building trade. Too principled to be attracted to New Labour, he found himself beached by Blairism.

Born in Tipton, near Dudley in the West Midlands, Pete was the eldest of five children of Ted and Mabel Carter, licensees of the Whitehall Tavern in Greets Green, West Bromwich. Unable to write when he left school at the age of 15, he became a skilled bricklayer, and in the late 1950s met Norma Harris, who was a huge influence on his political awakening. They married in 1962 and had two children, Sue and Mike.

By the mid-1960s, Pete was an enterprising national organiser of the Young Communist League. For one of the League's summer festivals, he booked the Kinks; during the Vietnam war, he organised support for the communist north with a Bikes for Vietnam campaign; and when the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, he expressed fierce opposition. The Stalinist old guard hated him for the next quarter of a century as he made the case through campaigning and action for the modernisation of the labour movement and linking up with new social movements.

In the early 1970s, as a shop steward on Bryant Estates sites in the Midlands, he and other communist militants succeeded in abolishing the "lump" casual labour system, improved wage rates and working conditions, and attracted enormous publicity through occupying the Rotunda site in Birmingham. Construction News magazine called the agreement with Bryant "a watershed in industrial relations in the building industry".

I recall a packed meeting in West Bromwich town hall in autumn 1979, when Pete was convenor – senior shop steward – of Sandwell council's direct labour organisation. Through a haze of cigarette smoke on stage, he lambasted management and called for an all-out strike. Suddenly, oratory turned to song, as he belted out a few verses of That Old Black Magic.

Pete persuaded workers on building sites to take down pin-ups from the canteen wall, and to buy copies of Robert Tressell's The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists from the boot of his car. Inspired by the "green bans" – industrial action in support of environmental aims – pioneered by the Australian builders' leader Jack Mundey, he saved Birmingham's Victoria Square post office through a dynamic campaign including demonstrations and construction-site crane occupations. Permission to demolish the post office was granted in 1973, and five years later it was reprieved, as was much of the rest of Victorian Birmingham.

His love life was turbulent: his marriage ended in separation in 1977, and Norma died 10 years later. Long-term relationships with Val and Jude followed, along with shorter affairs. In his final years, Pete lived on a canal boat in the West Midlands. He is survived by his children.

• Peter Edward Carter, trade unionist, political organiser and environmentalist, born 8 July 1938; died 11 October 2011

Housing the Working Class

2011-10-25T04:45:00.000-07:00

One of the most import buildings in the Midlands stands in the Worcestershire countryside. It is in the ownership of the National Trust but is not a stately home or a castle but a small workers cottage. It is called Rosedene and it is in Dodford, just three miles west of Bromsgrove in Worcestershire.

Great Dodford was the last development by the great Chartist Co-operative Land Society set up in 1845 to settle working class families on small plots of land. It was hoped that from a couple of acres a family could make a reasonable income. Chartist leader Fergus O’Conner had bought 273 acres, land of the former Dodford Priory, and hoped to settle seventy families there.

O’Conner’s plan had two objectives one was to ensure that working class people could qualify for the vote as there was a property threshold in 1832 Reform Act the other was the romance of a return to the land for those trapped in inner city slums.

Needless to say a combination of mixed objectives, poor organisation, a ruling class keen to ensure it would not work together with a “lying and slandering press” (not of course something we are familiar with) meant the project was not in the end a success. 70,000 shares had been sold in the Land Society and then properties where to be distributed by ballot amongst the shareholders.

In 1848, the House of Commons established a Select Committee to decide the fate of the Chartist Land Company, by then known as the National Land Company which had got into financial difficulties. As most of the shareholders had little or no chance of being allocated a smallholding it was deemed to be a lottery and therefore its registration as a company was declared illegal.

Fortunately this was not the end of Co-operative Housing in Worcestershire as today the largest provider of new build co-op homes in the country is not so very far away from Dodford in the new town of Redditch.
Redditch Co-op Homes manage nearly 300 properties in the town including apartments, houses and bungalows to suit varied needs, from young single people and families to older retired people.

Indeed across the West Midlands the Co-op housing model is getting a new lease of life. Carl Taylor, former manager at Redditch Homes, is now the Director of Birmingham Co-operative Housing Services part of the Accord Group of Housing Associations. BCHS provides management services for nine housing co-ops in the West Midlands and since 1997 have developed over fifty co-op and community controlled housing projects. Carl makes a powerful case that the current housing crisis is forcing everyone to look again at housing co-ops.

“We have to be innovative about how we finance new social housing developments”, he says “and working co-operatively to spread the investment risk is becoming an attractive option.”

Whilst Carl recognises that Fergus O,Conner may have got the details wrong in Dodford his legacy is still important, “co-operative housing is still just as much about political empowerment as it is about putting a roof over working class families heads”, he says. In the last few months even this government has come around to seeing the benefits of investing in housing co-ops. The latest bid round from the Homes and Communities Agency has brought some success to the region with three new Co-operative developments being supported creating a £26 million pound Co-operative House building programme.

“This is the largest Co-operative Housing development programme in the West Midlands since the 1980’s,”says Carl, “new Co-operative developments will take place in Redditch, Darlaston and Charlemont Farm in the Black Country and Garretts Green in Birmingham. This will see the building of at least 260 new homes”.

These developments will be a powerful advertisement for the co-operative housing model but Carl is ambitious for the co-operative housing sector. He has seen the impact of the co-op model in empowering communities, helping people gain confidence and improve their life chances. For him this is just the beginning the search is on to develop new ways of financing co-op housing. With interest rates at an all time low there is the potential for new housing bonds to give a steady return to potential investors.

“Rosedene in Dodford is a simple building but it really is very beautiful”, says Carl, “and as part of a community it embodies the hope that everyone can have a decent place to live where they can feel at home. We really have to try every avenue if we are to be the generation to finally fulfil O’Conners dream”.

Co-op's and the Jobs Crisis

2011-10-14T04:16:00.000-07:00

You would think that at a time when unemployment is once again inflicting untold damage on a new generation that any government would leave no stone unturned in getting people into work.

There is a sector that has continued to grow through the downturn, has outperformed UK economic growth every year since the 2008 banking collapse, is continuing to grow with the performance gap widening and is also expanding fastest in the new parts of the economy crucial for future economic development like renewable energy and environmental services.

It is a particularly resilient sector with new start ups out lasting their conventional competitors by a significant margin. A growing sector with a £33.2billion turnover employing over 236,000 people. Yet it is all but invisible when it comes to politicians and so called opinion formers.

That is of course the co-operative sector. Today there is so much interest in forming co-ops that the small number of co-op business advisors is overwhelmed by the demand. The movement has itself risen to the challenge the UK’s largest co-op, the Co-operative Group will by 2013 have ploughed £11 million into providing a specialist support and advice package to help new and existing co-op’s to become more sustainable businesses.

The service provided through the Co-operative Enterprise Hub puts those needing advice in contact with co-operative development specialists throughout the UK to enable them to access free advice, training and consultancy. The package can also include loans without security or personal guarantees.

Now this is a significant effort and clearly the Co-operative Group are fulfilling one of the key co-op principles that of co-operation amongst co-operatives. Many other co-ops help in similar ways like Lincoln and Midcounties. But we have to be honest and admit that this terrific effort on the part of the movement is scratching the surface of the potential for new co-op start-ups.

The fact is just one in every three thousand new business start-ups is a co-op! There are two main reasons for this. Firstly the chance of finding a business advisor who has any idea about co-op’s is decidedly slim.

There are some very good advisors out there in my own region we are blessed with the Coventry and Warwickshire Co-operative Development agency and the Gloucester based Co-operative Futures. But that is your lot so they have to cover a huge area with tiny staff numbers.

If that is not bad enough some mainstream business advisors are less than helpful and do their best to steer potential co-operators down the limited company route because that is all they understand and the registration process is simpler.

Which highlights the other reason - the sheer complexity of the regulatory environment new co-operative society’s face. New co-op start-ups have to be compliant with nineteen separate pieces of legislation! This is a tough ask when a group of people are taking a risk setting up of a new business. Co-operatives UK help with the process of registration ensuring that the cost is no more than establishing a limited company. This is very important as any error in registration can create huge problems further down the line.

Now after thirteen years of a Labour Government the fact that the co-operative movement has had to resort to winning piecemeal changes to legislation through very hard-won private members bills is a disgrace. Sadly this is what you get when the ruling party is in thrall to the monopolistic corporate sector. A sector which despite the rhetoric fears genuine competition.

The fact is that there is no chance of the corporate sector filling the huge gap in our economy being caused by the senseless attack on the public sector. Yet despite the governments myopia with a relatively modest level of public support we could double the number of co-ops in the UK in a short amount of time creating thousands of new businesses and many thousands of new jobs.

As well as start ups there is another untapped source of new co-operative businesses and that is the conversion of owner managed businesses. These types of businesses often face succession problems when the founder comes up to retirement. When there is no son or daughter with the skills or desire to take on the firm it can lead to closure or a painful acquisition by a competitor. Now the obvious successors are the workers but making this a genuine prospect requires education and support.

There is a considerable body of evidence that such transfers work well after all the John Lewis model that the government are always going on about (even if drawing the wrong lessons) was a successful transfer out of family ie private into workers ownership. Other examples of successful employee owned firms include the architects and consulting engineers, Arup Group, paper and board manufacturers, Tullis Russell and chemical makers, Scott Bader.

If the government was really committed to co-operative enterprise it would not be merely trying to pass off public sector privatisation as co-op development but would be just as enthusiastic about turning private firms into co-ops. Be in no doubt as Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett point out in their wonderful book the Spirit Level it is worth the effort. A country with a larger co-op sector would be a better place for all of us to live in.

Interested in starting a new co-op?

Go to www.co-operative.coop/enterprisehub

Not all Bankers are Bad!

2011-09-29T07:22:00.000-07:00

Whilst discussing bankers makes most people’s blood boil there is one bank that has quietly got on with delivering a good service to its customers without engaging in the kind of reckless activities that have bought the global economy to its knees. You may have missed its half yearly figures buried in the overall performance of the Co-operative Group. Despite the overall performance of the Co-op Group at the half year stage not being much to write home about, with the integration of Somerfield still causing issues in the Food Division, the Co-op Banks half year results whilst not spectacular did show steady improvement. The operating results are up a respectable 20% to £131 million and the steady increase in new account holders since the financial crash goes on with a 73% increase. The Bank gained 56,000 new customers (and therefore Co-op Group Members) in the half year.
The benefits of the Britannia merger are also now beginning to show with better savings products and this month Co-op Bank current account customers have access to an extra 245 branches as baking services are available in the Britannia outlets. These branches now offer Co-op Bank customers full access to everyday banking services, including paying in cash and cheques, withdrawing cash and making transfers to Co-op credit cards and Britannia savings accounts.
This more than trebles the number of available branches from 97 to 342. This is at a time when, according to the Campaign for Community Banking, 1,000 local communities have been left without a single bank branch.
It also seems that the Co-op Bank is the last credible bidder for the 630 branches that the Lloyds Banking Group, is being forced to sell under European Union rules on state bail-outs. And there is pressure from the Independent Commission on Banking for them to sell more than that. If successful this would be a huge increase in their branch coverage.
The lack of branches is something which many feel has slowed down their growth. Despite the huge growth in online banking, in which Smile the Co-ops own online service is a market leader, many customers still want access however infrequently to a bank branch.
Currently the Bank is a Money Which? Recommended Provider for current accounts, savings, credit cards and car insurance and its current account scores a high customer satisfaction rating of 86%. I have always found that there is an anti-co-op bias in Which? So this is praise indeed.
The real test of the benefits of the Banks development will be felt at the end of this year when the £729 million investment in new internal processes backed up with state of the art information technology should deliver a new business wide banking IT platform. This is being rolled out in stages. Last year saw the new online business banking facility and later this year the payments hub will go live. These new systems will give the Bank the most up to date and flexible back office systems around, increase their capacity and will enable the new merged organization to offer a totally integrated service to its customers.

It is wise I think to roll out such an enormous program in stages. I don’t think there has been any new large scale project that has work perfectly first time. There are always glitches and bugs in software systems that you have to operate the system to find.

To even be talking about such an enormous investment is amazing. The transformation of the Co-op Bank is remarkable. Just a few years ago to find a co-op bank outlet you would have had to find your way to a dusty corner of a Co-op shop just to gain access to a fairly rudimentary banking service. Yet today the Bank is a market leader in new products and customer service. There is no doubt that it has lead the rejuvenation of the Co-operative brand. The bank has long been the only Bank that consults its customers on its ethical policies and this year those Ethical policies will be extended to the £1bn of investments underpinning key insurance products.
Since the Ethical Policy was introduced in 1992, The Co-operative Bank has with held over £1billion of funding from business activities that its customers say are unethical. Having such a strong ethical stance has not however been bad for business because at the same time it has increased its commercial lending sixteen fold to almost £9 billion. This year the Bank has also strengthened its green credentials by extending its commercial lending in the area of energy efficiency and renewables from £400m to £1bn.
One group of people who have benefited from the Banks expansionary mood is UNISON members. The union’s members who switch to the Banks Current Account Plus before the end of the month will receive a benefit of £100 cash back, plus the Bank will make a £50 donation to UNISON Welfare charity in return for a minimum monthly deposit of £800.
Since the partnership between the Bank and Unison began the Bank has given more than £1.3 million to UNISON Welfare from financial products linked to the union.
UNISON members have until the end of the month to take advantage of this offer and the full terms and conditions can be found at www.britannia.co.uk/unison, or calling 0800 917 7066, or by visiting any one of The Co-operative Bank or Britannia branches.
They say you are more likely to get divorced than to change your bank account but nothing could be simpler and what’s more if they make any mistakes you are generously compensated. I know the Co-op Bank is still a bank and we all have a downer on banks at the moment but here is one way we can all be co-operators even if you are miles from a shop!

Sports fans, Spectators or Supporters?

2011-09-16T06:05:00.000-07:00

There has been much debate about the Morning Stars sports coverage. As a small circulation paper with a mission to promote socialist ideas should it dedicate so much space to mainstream sport? As someone who believes in the cultural importance of sport I see this as an important debate. I confess, I love county cricket, indeed the more meaningless the fixture the more I like it! I am also an ecumenical rugby fan enjoying League as much as Union. I have however fallen out of love with modern football. This is a complex issue and is perhaps something to do with the way football culture has become ubiquitous elevating players into celebrities.

I suspect it is because I don’t much like the people who play the game who despite their working class origins have become in the immortal words of Jonathan Meades, a “bespoke cast of gladiatorial yob-gods, wag-roasting Croesus kids, who once a week descend from their Parnassian blingsteads to run around for 90 golden minutes of bravura vanity”.

As the great CLR James pointed out when he said “What do they know of cricket, who only cricket know?” The social, political and economic context of sport is crucial to its understanding. My belief is that the role that football plays in our society has not changed as much as Sky television would like us to think. After all in English Journey, his account of a tour of the country in 1933, J.B. Priestley describes a game between Notts County and Notts Forest:

“Nearly everything possible has been done to spoil this game; the heavy financial interests; the absurd transfer and player selling system; the lack of any birth or residential qualification for the players; the betting and coupon competitions; the absurd publicity given to every feature of it by the Press; the monstrous partisanship of the crowds (with their idiotic cries of ‘play the game Ref’ when any decision against their side is given); but the fact remains that it is not yet spoilt and it has gone out to conquer the world.”

Well it has most certainly conquered the world but what I believe has changed since 1933 is not the game itself after all one of the reasons for its success is that it is fairly simple. What has changed is the role of the spectator. Are you just to sit in our arm chairs as a Sky subscriber as if it watching a soap opera? Is the spectator to be a mere consumer or is the role of the fan to be more than just cheerleader?

This is the key question being tackled by Supporters Direct the organisation that seeks to promote sustainable spectator sports clubs based on supporters' involvement & community ownership. Since they were formed in 2000 they have changed the nature of the debate about who owns our sports clubs.

One of the shortlisted candidates for Co-operative of the Year at this year’s Co-op Congress was to give it its full title The Exeter City AFC Supporters’ Society Limited, which as an Industrial and Provident Society (IPS) is a bona fide co-op and is the owner of Exeter City. I have to say when we saw how much they were able to do in their community from the base of the football club I was bowled over.
FC United of Manchester have shown what can be done from a standing start raising over a £1million in their community share issue towards the new ground planned to be at Moston. Fan owned clubs are on a roll. Many will be watching AFC Wimbledon back in the football league after their club was kidnapped and taken to Milton Keynes. I will be watching Telford United back in the Blue Square Premier after being rescued by their Supporters Trust. Indeed Telford is a hot bed of co-operation with the local ice hockey team the Telford Tigers being the only co-operative owned team in the national ice hockey league.

Supporters Direct have a proud record with 150 Trusts at clubs up and down the country bringing £25million of new finance into football alone, with 26 clubs now in Trust ownership and 110 having shareholdings in their clubs. This trend I believe can only go one way. With the greatest club in the world, Barcelona, being in fan ownership what better advertisement for this model could there be?
But it is not just football, in Rugby League there are now supporters owned clubs such as Rochdale Hornets and Hunslett. Many cricket clubs too are in co-operative ownership, including Surrey, Lancashire and Glamorgan which all feature in the UK’s top 100 Co-ops.

Modern fans can be more than just passive supporters and fan ownership has to be the way forward after all who is more committed to a club and more hungry for success than its fans? Who are the only people who can be trusted to stick with a club through thick and thin when the sugar daddies that see clubs as trophy assets bringing them status lose interest or go bust!
I hope our sports coverage can cover more of the political-economy of sport. Ownership really does matter. Who is profiting from the business of sport? And to those who think this is OK for the minor league clubs but not for the Premier League giants - remember when the banks where too big to fail?

Fellowship is heaven

2011-07-12T06:34:00.000-07:00

Review Essay

The Story of HF Holidays by Harry Wroe
Published by HF Holidays 2007

Voices of Wortley Hall, The Story of “Labour’s Home”, 1951-2011 by John Cornwell
Published by Wortley Hall, 2011

These are amongst that substantial library of celebratory self published co-operative society histories but none the worse for that. HF Holidays can trace its lineage back over a century whilst at sixty Wortley Hall is just a youngster. They have in common the quest for working class educational holidays.

The Holiday Fellowship (now HF Holidays) was registered as an Industrial and Provident Society in 1913 when it was a fundamentalist breakaway from the Co-operative Holiday Association (CHA) formed in 1897. The origins of the CHA can be found in the teachings of Dr. J.B. Paton, principal of the Nottingham Congregational Institute, who believed that,

“The wealth of a country does not consist in the number or exchangeable value of its agricultural or manufactured or artistic products,
so much as in the strength and intelligence and virtue of the men and women whom it rears.”

Paton was born in Galston in Ayrshire in 1830, where his father had been a hand-loom weaver before becoming the manager of the town’s co-operative store. He was an advocate of the National Home Reading Union (NHRU) dedicated to spreading adult literacy and his teaching inspired Thomas Arthur Leonard, originally from Stoke Newington, who trained at the Institute for the congregational ministry. He began his ministry in Barrow before moving to Colne his preaching at Colne lead to the formation of the Co-operative Holiday Association, from amongst NHRU members, his sermon at the Dockray Congregational Church on the theme of “The philosophy of holiday making” was reported in the Colne and Nelson Times of Friday August 7th 1891.

Driven by a spirit of temperance and Christian Socialism he felt the workers of Colne deserved to escape the usual trips to Blackpool or Morecombe with their “perverse or corrupt conceptions of life and conduct”. To this end he formed a rambling club which, in June 1891, took thirty participants to Ambleside, in the Lake District. These became annual affairs attracting large numbers using properties belonging to the NHRU and their supporters. In 1894 a committee was elected with Leonard as General Secretary and in 1896 they acquired their first property in Whitby. Then in 1897 they formalised the loose organisation as the Co-operative Holiday Association although co-operative in name it does not appear to have been a formal co-operative.

By 1913 the CHA had grown to eighteen centres but despite its working class origins it had become “rather middle class in spirit and conservative in ideas”. It had gained support from rich industrialists such as Sir William Mather of the Manchester firm Mather and Platt who helped “balance the books”. Leonard wanted to return to the idea of “strenuous and simple” holidays and the Holiday Fellowship was born and a headquarters was acquired at Bryn Corach at Conwy in North Wales, purchased for £5,096, quite a sum in 1914, and in HF hands until the end of 2010.

Not the best year to form a working class holiday organisation holidays started at Easter 1914. A week at Conwy would set you back 32s 6d with an extra 4s6d for the walking excursions. It is quite remarkable that despite two world wars, a depression and huge social upheavals the Holiday Fellowship is approaching its centenary in rude health. The basic idea has remained the same throughout.

The development of HF follows a common co-operative trajectory. Firstly you need a charismatic individual or small group who see a clear market opportunity that requires more than a commercial rational i.e. it has to be driven by more than the pursuit of profit. Co-operative businesses often grow out of strong communities and this is clearly the case here. Leonard was certainly charismatic he also had a role in the formation of the Youth Hostels Association and with Canon Rawnsley in the Lake District the early years of the National Trust.

He had a Whitmanite approach to the natural world and with his advocacy of ‘rational dress’ for women when out walking on the fells was ahead of his time. All successful co-operative societies need active members and the model the Holiday Fellowship employed of having a system of leaders ensured member engagement. They are a key group of volunteers who act as walking guides but also carry the culture of HF holidays out amongst the wider membership. That culture was for a very long time rather Spartan, it is perhaps no coincidence that before the First World War Leonard became a Quaker and the Quaker value of simplicity was certainly reflected in the business.

This model also helped keep the costs down, fresh air and walking are not expensive commodities but over the decades a major change in customer expectations has taken place. This was tackled by another key co-operative issue - the employment in the enterprise of professional management. Properties have had to be modernised and assets have had to be turned over. Unlike the CHA which changed its name to Countrywide in 1964 continuing as an association of walkers but selling its holiday operations to commercial operators.

HF has in modern times after a couple of sticky patches managed both to take on professional management including using modern marketing techniques including the innovative use of the internet and to renew the business model by a strong return to co-operative values and principles. Leonard who was also a strong internationalist, represented by having a centre in Germany as early as 1914, would approve of the current brochure (2011) of 236 pages covering the 16 UK HF centres but also including holidays in every part of the world from Japan to Peru.

This has been achieved according to the current Chief Executive, Brian Smith, by strengthening the co-operative nature of the business and making membership more than just a loyalty scheme - by making member ownership a reality. This strategy has included a significant increase in member communications and in their role as investors in the business.

This takes me onto Wortley Hall and the things they could perhaps learn from the renewal of the mission of HF holidays. The story of Wortley Hall is also that of the vision of one man, Vin Williams (1893-1970). He had been a lecturer with the National Council of Labour Colleges. The NCLC had grown out of the Central Labour College which had been created following the strike at Ruskin College and the formation of the ‘Plebs’ league in 1908. What the Plebs had realised is that,

“If the education of the workers is to square with the ultimate object of the workers – social emancipation – then it is necessary that the control of any such an educational institution must be in the hands of the workers.”

This principle was very important to Williams who whilst having been imprisoned during the General Strike for sedition was an ecumenical socialist, embracing, Trade Union, Labour Party and Co-operative views. His son, who he named Lenin, known as Len, recalls that he “saw himself as member of the whole Labour movement.” Black listed after the General Strike, after many attempts to make a living including a period of bankruptcy he had become a lecturer in the NCLC.

William’s NCLC district covered Sheffield and the North Midlands and he ran schools across the region, mainly in hotels and when he saw Wortley Hall he realised its potential as a permanent home for workers educational holidays. Friends in the Amalgamated Engineering Union (AEU), Mick Shaw and Alf Hague came to see the derelict building that Williams was raving about. Williams used every contact he had in the Labour Movement to get support for the Hall bringing together representatives of the AEU, FBU, NUM, USDAW, NUR, Co-op Party and Labour Party in 1951 to establish a committee with Harry Johnson, AEU full time official as Chair and himself as secretary. The first years rent was just £50 which just shows how derelict it was.

Williams spent a considerable amount of time fund raising around the labour movement. The story of how he assembled a huge army of volunteer skilled labour, needed for restoration, has become part of the Wortley Hall folklore. The hall was opened by Sir Frank Soskice MP KC in front of “3,000 rain drenched enthusiasts”. That year the syllabus of lectures at the Hall could be booked through your trade union branch or through Co-op Travel Services. The link with the Co-operative movement was very important, the first treasurer Bill Robinson was manager of the Co-op Bank in Sheffield, and until 1994 when they moved to Unity Trust, the Halls finances were a part of the Co-op Bank manger’s job description.

The Hall had been established as an Industrial and Provident Society in 1952 and took its part in the Co-op Union and Co-op Party. It was sadly an incident with the Co-op bank that bought Williams involvement with the Hall to an end. The purchase of some new furniture in 1958 saw Williams’s signature on the cheques. As he was an un-discharged bankrupt the Bank refused to honour the cheque. Other members of the management committee could sign cheques but he could not he was mortally offended that his integrity had been questioned and he left the Hall never to return.

This was a sad end to his engagement with the Hall as he had done all the hard work, taking the Hall through the period when visitors had to bring their ration books and a visit to Wortley was “the socialist equivalent of a week at Butlins”. Williams had gained the engagement of different parts of the Labour movement by getting them to sponsor the various “wings” of the building named after hero’s from different parts of the movement, Robert Owen, Keir Hardie, Tom Mann and George Lansbury.

Williams was succeeded by Alf Hague, a very different character; involved since 1950 and he was a long standing member of the Communist Party who the author points out saw themselves as the “sea-green in-corruptibles.” He shaped the Hall for the next thirty years. His first challenge was to purchase the Hall outright from the Wharncliffe family who where facing considerable death duties. He managed to buy the Hall outright for £10,000 by October 1959.

For years the model worked well with Trade Union and political schools and working class holiday weeks. They generated record surpluses, which thanks to the Co-op Bank connection were wisely invested. By 1970 the building had been Grade II listed and by 1976 the Historic Buildings Council valued the Hall and its 27 acres of grounds at £3.75 million.

However following its 25th anniversary celebrations the cracks began to appear in its offering. They had opened part of the building as a working-mens club which generated considerable revenue but had closed the share-register in 1962 as they felt they had enough “owners” and it was not fully opened again for twenty years. As tastes changed the Hall had become dated this came to a head when following the tough year of 1983 the FBU demanded improvements. Alf Hague was cautious, he saw improvements that some advocated as self-indulgence and had built the business generating considerable surpluses but his frugal style was out of the fashion of the times.

Eventually it was realised that if the Hall was to renew its purpose for a new era he would have to go. His successor in 1991 was Brian Clarke who saw through a complete change in the basis of operations despite a huge financial black hole opening up. For the trade union movement these were difficult times with a fundamental change in working class culture. In 1994 they renewed their links with the wider Labour movement by hosting the now annual South Yorkshire Festival in the grounds of the Hall. This has been followed by a steady up grading of the offer to the point in 2005 when they appointed their first professional hotel and catering manager.

In the last decade the gardens as well as the Hall have undergone considerable restoration, the restoration of the stained glass windows cost £35,000, the fountain was restored, the house gained four stars from the English Tourist Board, and the gardens gained the gold award from Yorkshire in bloom. Even the kitchen garden came back into use with organic status generating 4 tonnes of produce in 2010.

The first conference in the Hall in 1951 was of the British Federation of Young Co-operators many of the participants ended up having significant political careers like Ted Graham, later National secretary of the Co-op Party and MP and Betty Boothroyd who famously became the first women speaker of the House of Commons. Last year thirty four organisations had conferences in the Hall and despite the fact the Hall continues to provide a space for working class education it has also proven itself as a four star country house hotel.

Today the debate within the Co-operative movement about Co-operative education is very much alive. Can genuine co-operative education take place in mainstream institutions or do we need independent co-operative spaces for co-operative education to take place? If spaces like Wortley Hall are to survive and prosper then there is a responsibility for the Hall to engage with the whole movement and the whole movement to engage with it.

In many ways the arguments of Vin Williams and the “Plebs” are unresolved. It maybe that the transmission of culture is as important as formal education and perhaps that is what Wortley Hall could learn from the Holiday Fellowship. After all as William Morris said:

“Fellowship is heaven, and lack of fellowship is hell: fellowship is life, and lack of fellowship is death: and the deeds ye do upon the earth, it is for fellowship’s sake that ye do them”.

Amazon Booksellers

2011-07-12T06:27:00.000-07:00

“Go on living while you may, striving with whatsoever pain and labour needs must be, to build up little by little the new day of fellowship, rest and happiness. If others can see as I have seen it, then it may be called a vision rather than a dream.”
William Morris, News from Nowhere, 1891.

What a buzz at Co-op Congress a real sense that now is time for a greater role for the co-operative movement in the economy. The co-operative retail sector is gaining confidence, there are new co-ops springing up every day and the movement is weathering the recession better than private business.

I thought I was in a dream when, as a bookaholic, I entered the congress exhibition but that vision turned out to be the News from Nowhere bookstall. With Sara and Sal making everyone welcome it quickly became the place to hang out, supping excellent fair-trade Revolver coffee and chewing the fat over all matters co-operative, whilst browsing the stalls splendidly eclectic stock. It also had the edge as the place to pick up your free copy of the Morning Star kindly provided by Birmingham Readers and Supporters Group.

This was NfN’s first time at Co-op Congress but they are no strangers to co-op bookselling. May Day 1974 saw them first open their doors on Liverpool’s Manchester Street. Three moves later they are at 96 Bold Street in a 5-storey building owned by the workers co-operative as a not-for-profit community business. It has been run as a women’s collective for thirty years providing women with their first experience of running a business, building up their skills and confidence in bookselling, retail and accounts.

They try to put their values into practice with all staff receiving equal pay rates and collective decision making – no boss here! You could write the recent radical history (or perhaps herstory!) of Liverpool from those who have passed through their doors. Always more than a bookshop, the children’s area has toys and a comfy chair for tired or breastfeeding mums; many lesbians and gay men have found it a welcoming place when first “coming out” and numerous campaigns have found support here; Troops Out, Reclaim The Night, Striking Miners, Greenham Women and the Liverpool Dockers have all been welcomed.

They have strong local links with initiatives such as Sahir House, Black History Month, Africa Oye, Liverpool Friends of Palestine, the Hillsborough Justice Campaign, as well as refugee and women’s groups. Countless conferences have had their horizons expanded by a NfN bookstall. And where else in Liverpool can you celebrates, Chinese New Year, Martin Luther King Day, International Women’s Day, Jewish Book Week, St Patrick’s Day, Pride Week, Hiroshima Day, World Aids Day & Kwanzaa?

Anti-war from Vietnam to Iraq they have always been ahead of the curve on difficult issues even boycotting Barclays bank cheques during apartheid days. Over the years they have been called alternative, radical, feminist and now community so whilst their vocabulary has improved their values have remained stubbornly constant - to provide access to books and information on the reality of the world and how to change it and ourselves for the better.

They must be doing something right as they recently had a visit from the English Defence League. The EDL thugs more than met their match, back in the 80’s, the shop suffered a spate of arson attacks form racist groups and is more than capable of looking after itself with the support of its many friends in the City.

The EDL must have been attracted by their 30th Birthday Celebrations which ran under the banner of – “We are All Immigrants” – making the simple case that we all come from somewhere and showing solidarity with the City’s latest wave of migrants. Today they are Liverpool’s main independent bookshop, carrying a significant range of World Music and a selection of the weekly radical press. As there is only ONE left wing daily they make sure their local newsagent has a stock of the Morning Star. They take pride in helpful customer service and highly efficient ordering facilities, which have generated strong links with local universities and colleges.

In a world of the internet and multinational corporate chains, an independent, grassroots co-operative could struggle to compete, and serious difficulties with dilapidated buildings, ruthless landlords, and fierce competition have had to be overcome but News From Nowhere has shown what can be achieved by dedicated workers, with over 60 years bookselling experience between them and determined community support for a vital resource.

Now you don’t have to live in Liverpool to be part of that community they now have a super on line service which can supply pretty much any book in print so if you see a book reviewed in the Star and you wonder where you can get it simply go to: www.newsfromnowhere.org.uk and you can get your books from Amazons!

Summer of Co-op Celebration

2011-06-20T06:16:00.000-07:00

Last year saw the very first co-operative fortnight. They say that imitation is the best form of flattery and that was the way Ed Mayo the new Director General saw it when in introducing Co-ops Fortnight he sought to emulate the success the fair-trade movement had achieved in raising its profile with “Fairtrade Fortnight”.
Last years Co-ops fortnight certainly helped raise the profile of the co-operative business model at a time when greater clarity and understanding was clearly required. At the time a day did not seem to go by without a Condem politician bandying the “John Lewis Model” about without any clear understanding of what the model actually amounts to.
This year Co-operatives UK aims to go one further with Co-op fortnight (something of an elastic term - 25th June to 9th July) by launching a petition with the aim of getting 100,000 signatures and thereby securing a parliamentary debate. The issue that the Co-operative movement is raising is the importance of wider ownership. The gap between rich and poor is once again widening. Today half of the UK population own just one percent of the nation’s wealth when a generation ago they owned 12 per cent.
Unlike bankers bonuses sharing ownership with workers consumers and residents spreading ownership and wealth is both good for the economy and for society. So this year Co-operatives UK is calling upon the Government to encourage firms to share profits with, staff, customers and the communities they serve. To promote the community ownership of key local amenities like village shops and local pubs and to enable people to take action on housing, arts, sport, land, finance and green energy and to create a level playing field by removing the legal barriers that make establishing a co-operative business more difficult than a private company.
Of course this is just the beginning public understanding of the co-operative business model is to say the least poor so this is just the beginning of a process of making the model better understood and better appreciated. Of course the co-op model is not suitable for every type of business or service but there is no doubt that the sector could be a great deal larger than it currently is.
Even many people who engage with a co-operative everyday do not always appreciate the benefits of the co-op model. Not something I would hope that could be said of Morning Star readers. As we enter the cycle of the annual meetings of the Peoples Press Printing Society it is worth remembering that the co-operative structure the Daily Worker adopted in 1945 to widen the ownership of the paper has served the business well.
Since it was formed as an Industrial and Provident Society there have certainly been enormous changes in newspaper publishing, not all of them for the better, but the Society has with the support of its members held firm providing a legal structure and a sound basis for publishing a daily newspaper in the most challenging of environments.
A huge number of publishing businesses that have fallen by the wayside over this period and they were not trying to carve out a special political space in support of the working class movement and its allies. It is tough to produce a daily paper when having the backing of millionaire proprietors and large scale commercial advertisers but to do it, with only the support of the Labour movement and its readers, is I think an immense challenge that successive workers and management have faced with tremendous fortitude and one that readers should never take for granted.
I know that for me the Morning Star, as the paper has been since 1966, is a daily voice of sanity in a mad world. It was sixty five years ago that at a huge gathering in the Albert Hall London bus workers leader Bill Jones handed the formal document of transfer of the Peoples Press Printing Society to Bill Rust. An early shareholder, taking the then £200 maximum, was none other than George Bernard Shaw. Soon the Society had twenty thousand shareholders including 266 trade union organisations and 45 co-operatives.
Sadly in fit of sectarianism the Co-operative Union refused the paper membership on the spurious grounds that it might be in competition with the Co-operative Press! Well I am glad to say, as a Director of Co-operatives UK, the modern day successor to the Co-op Union, that The PPPS is now a member and able to take its place with all the other co-operatives at Co-operative Congress.
I hope the PPPS will take its place at this years Co-op Congress from 24-26 June in Birmingham. I very much hope the PPPS will be represented and will share with other co-operators the lessons it has learnt over the years and pass on some advice to younger co-ops the secret of its resilience.
Today the Morning Star shines brighter than ever and that is due in no small part to the work of the members of the Peoples Press Printing Society, both individuals and organisations and their elected representatives on the management committee who have worked behind to scenes to keep the Star, the only daily newspaper owned by its readers, shining!

For more information about Co-op Congress go to: www.uk.co-op/congress and for details of the petition go to www.uk.coop/yourstoshare

150 years of Kropotkin's Footnote!

2011-05-25T07:25:00.000-07:00

Lincoln Co-operative Society Celebrates its 150th Anniversary.

Sadly the Lincoln Equitable Co-operative Society only rates a footnote in the second edition of that old anarcho-communist Peter Kropotkin’s seminal book, Fields, Factories and Workshops. This is the book in which Kroptkin laments the fact that; “Under the pretext of division of labour, we have sharply separated the brain worker from the manual worker”.
Originally published in 1898 alongside the Conquest of Bread and Mutual Aid it is one of Kropotkin’s most important works. In it he talks of a new “mutualist” venture – the Lincoln Equitable Co-operative Society. So here we have it, 1898 and the Lincoln Co-op is already making waves.
Founded in 1861 by a joiner from Gainsborough, Thomas Parker, it began trading from 1, Napoleon Place, Lincoln, in September 1861, wisely “goods where sold for ready money only”. After the first quarter they had 74 members and paid out a dividend of 9 old pence!
The society’s mission was the “domestic, social and intellectual advancement of its members” so in 1876, they established an Education Committee and having raised £18 from concerts and readings opened a free reading room twenty years before Lincoln’s first public library.
Lincolnshire Co-operative Society today has expanded across the county and into Newark in Nottinghamshire. This year the Society celebrates its 150th anniversary with a slightly larger membership - 198,000 - who last year received a dividend payment of £4.3million.
With sales of £278 million, a trading surplus of over £20million, two hundred outlets from food stores, pharmacies, post offices, home stores, travel agents, coffee shops, florists, a car dealership, funerals and even their own a bakery. This I suppose at least ensures the conquest of bread.
In the report to members in 1863 the Society told them to “Have faith in the lovely principle of co-operation and cast your mountain of woe into the sea”. Today faced with the retailing juggernauts of the big five supermarkets the performance of Lincoln Society is even more remarkable than it was in Kropotkin’s day.
For a regional consumer retail society to consistently deliver such staggering results for the community it serves and its members is more than remarkable. The Society is staunchly committed co-operative principles as well as fair trade and to local sourcing. They have a real commitment to local produce and it’s not just Lincolnshire sausage and Lincolnshire poacher cheese. They sell a large range of local sourced foods supporting local producers and cutting down on food miles.
The society established and continues to support the Lincolnshire Co-operative Development Agency which offers business support across the county. The 150th Anniversary gives the Society much to reflect on indeed for the 50th anniversary in 1911 a history was written by the then secretary Duncan McInnes and in 1961 a centenary history was written by Frank Buckshaw and Duncan McNab. The 150th will not be an exception and former Director Alan Middleton is writing a new history of the Society.
Lincoln has always been fiercely independent and is deeply embedded into its local community is it any wonder when last year it shared £132,000 amongst 1500 Lincolnshire groups and charities. This year to mark the anniversary their big birthday award means they will be sharing £500,000 with 150 local good causes – there you have some genuine mutual aid!
But do not think it is all looking backwards. Lincoln is one of the most innovative and dynamic societies in the country. It is engaged in using its property portfolio to drive economic development and buying a pharmaceutical distribution business. Chief Executive Ursula Lidbetter is well known within the movement as a staunch champion of co-operation and in standing up for members having a key role in society governance. Currently she is Chair of the Co-operative Group’s Food board bringing her Lincoln experience to the national stage.
Ursula has been inspired by the passion and zeal of the founders of Lincoln Co-op 150 years ago who started the society not to generate profits or seek returns on their capital, but because they wanted to make a difference. She says; “Whatever members needed, the society found a way to provide it and the same ethos applies today, we collaborate with our community because that’s what we’re all about. If we can help we do, but if you want community development, you’ve got to be in the community.”
“Co-operation?” she adds, “you know it when you see it — regardless of the structure or the name. All our co-ops were founded because of the desperate need for trust, fairness and integrity. Yet there’s a whole generation who thinks of the Co-op as just another supermarket. That demonstrates the scale of the task the Movement faces.”
Here is a clear example of Kropotkin’s brains and hands working together - the true secret of Lincoln’s success is in being true to Co-operative values instead of just trying to be another supermarket. That is a lesson for all of us.

Wortley Hall @ 60

2011-05-25T07:21:00.000-07:00

Happy Birthday to the Workers Stately Home!

At a time when we are battling so that workers can retire at sixty I am glad to see that one Labour movement institution has reached its diamond anniversary without a hint of retiring! I have always had a soft spot for Wortley Hall, I first went there longer ago than I like to admit, as it was the venue for the weekend schools of the old Midland Section of the Co-op Party.

Wortley Hall, between Sheffield and Huddersfield, is set in 26 acres of formal gardens and woodlands, was the ancestral home of the Earls of Wharncliffe, we are unsure when the original hall was built but it is known that Sir Thomas Wortley, born in 1440, lived at the Manor Wortley until 1510.

Sir Thomas, on the wrong side during the English Civil War, was taken by Parliamentary forces to the Tower of London. The hall then fell into decay until the mid eighteenth century when Edmund Wortley commissioned its rebuilding. The family’s new wealth came from the black diamond’s of the South Yorkshire coalfield. The Hall was occupied by the Army during the war, but with the coming of peace and the nationalisation of the mines it fell into what looked like terminal decline.

This all changed at a meeting in May 1950 when former miner Vin Williams proposed to local labour movement activists that Wortley Hall should become an education and recreation home for workers who would be both the owners and the users. The Hall was lifted out of almost derelict condition by a great deal of voluntary work with supporters carrying out much needed repairs and restoration. Then on May 5th 1951 it was opened as an education and holiday centre for the trade union, labour and co-operative movement.

For sixty years, successive generations have maintained that commitment and built on the sacrifices of those workers to keep Wortley Hall as the Workers Stately Home. It has always been run on co-operative principles and is a member of the Co-operatives UK and registered as a Friendly Society.

Today, with four stars from the English Tourist Board, the Hall is looking better than ever. The effort that has gone into bringing the accommodation and grounds up to the very highest standards has really paid off. The grounds laid out in an Italinate style on an eastward facing slope enjoying magnificent views over the Vale of Worsborough are absolutely glorious.

The Hall can host conferences for up to 175 delegates, with seven conference rooms and 49 en-suite bedrooms, all equipped with direct telephone lines and internet connections. Recently upgraded is the Unite ballroom, paid for mainly by Unite branches.

Another recent development has been the creation of two holiday cottages set in the old stable yard. The area has some excellent cycling and walking as the Hall is not far from the Peak District, the Yorkshire Sculpture Park and for those wishing to travel further afield there is the ‘last of the summer wine country’ of Holmfirth.

Starting in May there are some exciting events to mark the anniversary especially intriguing are a series of folk song workshops with some very talented musicians and wordsmiths both to enjoy folk song but also to have ago at creating some new ones. Developed by Steel Valley Beacon Arts, participants include Pete Coe, Gavin Davenport, Ian Enters, Robin Garside, Bryony Griffith and Chris Mcshane.

The grounds are also the home of the South Yorkshire Festival, celebrating workers worldwide, which takes place on Saturday 2nd July this year, an excellent day out, in a delightful setting.

In August Jo Stanley will be giving the Sylvia Pankhurst memorial lecture which is sponsored by the National Assembly of Women, the Sylvia Pankhurst Memorial Committee and Wortley Hall.

And don’t forget organisations and individuals can apply for shares which are in £5 units. For a small sum you too can have a share in the Workers Stately Home! If you are a member of a Trade Union, Labour or Co-operative organisation you are eligible to become an individual shareholder. This entitles you to participate in the running of Wortley Hall so for more information go to: www.wortleyhall.org.uk

Is Co-operative Energy the Answer to a Toothless OFGEM?

2011-04-06T07:15:00.000-07:00

In last month’s Morning Star we heard that Ofgem (the energy regulator) was giving the energy utilities “one last chance” to stop ripping customers off or face a full bloodied Competition Commission inquiry. The regulator said that it had found evidence that the 'big six' suppliers – EDF, British Gas, E.ON, RWE npower, Scottish and Southern and Scottish Power – increase customers' bills more quickly when wholesale energy costs go up than they cut them when they come down.

Talk about stating the blinking obvious. No wonder Mike O'Connor, chief executive of Consumer Focus, said: "Consumers have less confidence in energy companies than in any other sector – they feel that prices aren't fair, that tariffs are too complex and that the market doesn't treat them well."

It seems there has been as much wind generated from energy sector investigations as there has been energy from wind. To date this is the 18th inquiry. It was greedy energy companies increasing bills to near-record highs on the back of last winter’s record low temperatures that put pressure for Ofgem to investigate the sector for making excessive profits yet again.

After this investigation, Alistair Buchanan, Ofgem chief, ordered the power companies to simplify the bewildering array of 350 different available tariffs which they use to bamboozle customers and make price comparisons nigh on impossible. He added that there was still not enough competition and threatened them with a Competition Commission referral. In response the industry has been working overtime lobbying politicians and the media, warning that a referral, would delay their spending plans and new nuclear plants and an expansion of renewables until the outcome is clear.

Unsurprisingly, the former Rugby schoolboy, Tory Energy Minister Charles Hendry MP, whose business career was in Public Relations, (with Ogilvy & Mather and Burson-Marsteller), soon got to work - representing the industry. Last month he seemed to back the firms when he said of the big six that a Competition referral could scare them off from investing in the UK. It appears his corporate networking skills, he was founder of the Agenda Group, a specialist consultancy helping company Chairmen and CEO’s with corporate networking, have paid off!

Many industry insiders however think that Ofgem’s position is mere posturing as a Competition Commission referral would in reality expose Ofgem’s own failings and its role in creating the current system.

Clearly for ordinary consumers the privatisation of our energy supply industry has been a disaster. The structure has been described as “one of pretend competition and impotent regulation” but whilst we are waiting for a government with the backbone to take back the industry is there anything we can do as consumers?
Well I have decided to make the switch to the new kid on the block: Co-operative Energy, the brainchild of the UK’s third largest consumer co-operative Midcounties Co-operative Society.

I had been buying my energy via the TUC affinity scheme ‘Union Energy’ supplied by Scottish Power however when that scheme came to an end I was left buying my energy from Iberdrola S.A. as Scottish Power has been taken over by the giant Spanish utility.

This lead to an enlightening telephone conversation with someone from Scottish Power – they rang me up to ask me why I was switching. I said I had sympathy for the plight of the Spanish economy and great respect for the Basque people but I did not see why the profits from supplying me with energy should go to Bilbao. The person was clueless as to who the owners of the business he was working for where and found it hard to believe I could have a stake in the business I bought my energy from.
So I have given Co-operative Energy a chance, switching has been remarkably easy, with no shareholders to please, at least the decisions they make are in my best interests and by becoming a Midcounties member I get a share of the profits. They pledge that they will always offer a fair price and whilst they may not be the cheapest at certain points, they aim to make sure they’re competitive over the long-term.

They also pledge to have just one simple price (that’s a relief) with no gimmicks, and to make everything as simple as possible such as explaining how the energy is sourced and how the prices are worked out, being open and transparent in everything they do.

They aim for the carbon content of their electricity to be less than half the national average by April 2012 and like all co-operative businesses, aim to be ethical in their dealings with individuals and businesses.

The Co-operative supply of energy is not uncommon around the world; indeed in the land of the so called free some 47 of those United States have co-operative electricity suppliers. If you do an internet search for the ‘Co-operative Energy Company’ you may find yourself in Sibley, Iowa. The most impressive US electricity co-operative business is Touchstone Energy, an alliance of energy co-operatives, it has the highest customer satisfaction rating of all US energy utilities, so is it any wonder it has some 40 million customers.

Co-operative Energy is a new business and it will take a while to get to that level of membership but the more members it has the greater will be its buying power. The new business also faces that fact that its current energy mix may not be as biased towards renewable as some would wish but it does aim to be competitive and to work towards lower carbon inputs.

Well if Co-operative Energy this side of the Atlantic fails to fulfill its pledges they will have me to deal with at their AGM. So if you are fed up with being taken for a sucker by Ofgem and want to give the ‘big six’ energy companies a miss why not see if Co-operative Energy is for you. To find out more go to: www.cooperativeenergy.coop.

Goths Versus Vandals

2011-03-14T06:27:00.000-07:00

The beautiful village of Hesket Newmarket in the Caldbeck Fells is home to the Old Crown reputedly Britain’s first co-operative pub. Today when the greed of pubco’s and cut price supermarket beer is driving a swathe through Britain’s pubs it is good to hear of a community coming together to take control of an important local institution.
The good folk of the village had earlier come together to save the brewery behind the pub when it came on the market keen to save the prize winning ales.
Julian Ross, who led the bid by customers to take ownership of the pub, said “People say they don’t care about making a return on their investment. They want to preserve something that is important for the community. Regulars and visitors alike always find a warm welcome, great home cooked food (including the famous Old Crown curries), a friendly smile and a truly superb range of real ales.”
When in the depths of the recession almost 40 pubs were closing a week, community co-operative ownership had been successful in saving village shops, so it was a short step to apply the model to pubs. In March last year in response to this success the government announced a £3.3million support program to help develop community owned pubs.
Needless to say despite the ‘Big Society’ rhetoric the Condem’s by August had bought the axe to the program. In January this year anxious to help the 82 communities left high and literally dry, a group including, the Plunket Foundation, Co-operatives UK, the Co-op Group and CAMRA (there are now seven community owned pubs in the Good Beer Guide) came together with a support package. Community ownership however is not just the middle classes playing at landlord.
The Star Inn, in Higher Broughton, Salford, was given three weeks’ notice of closure last summer but locals clubbed together, now it is back in business as Britain’s first urban community-owned co-operative pub.
Local Margaret Fowler has said: "The Star Inn has been part of the community since 1867. People really missed it when it was closed down and that brought us all together to invest our own cash to re-open the pub. It really was easy to set it up as a co-operative and now we have got our pub back, it’s the most fantastic feeling in the world."
Now this seems like a new idea but it got me thinking because I first visited a community owned pub on a trip to Scotland many years ago. It was in Newtongrange or Nitten as it is known locally. Home of the Lady Victoria Colliery, in 1890, it was the largest coal mining village in Scotland. Sadly the pit has gone and today it is home to the Scottish Mining Museum.
Despite all the changes the village has seen one local institution has stood steadfastly by the community both as an important social centre and as a benefactor - the Dean Tavern.
Back in the 1890’s the pit generated a lot of thirsty miners. It was a struggle for the Lothian Coal Company to get a license against a strong temperance movement. Resistance was overcome by agreeing to open a pub on “Gothenburg Principles”.
The Gothenburg principles come from the Swedish City. Sweden had a huge drink problem in the nineteenth century with every house owner legally allowed to have their own still.
In 1855 a law was passed banning domestic distilling and giving local authorities powers to grant licenses. The city of Gothenburg pioneered a system in which spirit licences were awarded to a trust which ran licensed premises in a way that would not encourage excessive drinking.
The premises were to be clean but unattractive, with employees having no interest in pushing sales to make a profit and the shareholders limited to a 5% return. All profits above 5% were to go to the City to be used to benefit the local community. It was a system that proved to be extremely profitable.
The idea was taken up by public house reformers and temperance campaigners in Scotland. Public house trusts or Goths were set up in Peebles, Leven, Clydebank, Broxburn and Tranent but most dramatically with the coal companies in Central Scotland.
There were 'Goths' in the Lothians, Stirlingshire, Ayrshire, and in Fife, where the system really took off. Often like in Nitten the coal companies were the source of funds and were a dominant force on the trust boards, but miners too contributed capital and gained representation.
Despite the fact the pubs were not to be welcoming, no credit, no betting, no gambling, no games or amusements (even dominoes was banned), the community facilities and beneficiaries funded by them was huge. They funded libraries, museums, parks, bowling and cricket grounds and pavilions, cinemas, community centres or 'Gothenburg halls' and gave grants to galas, charities, clubs and societies and even funded district nurses and ambulances.
In its first year of 1900-01 the Dean Tavern generated a profit of £340. Over the years the pub has contributed enormously to the village. Without it the place would be without numerous village landmarks that exist because of the Deans profits. Today the Trust continues to support village societies with annual grants and during the miner's strike of 1984-85, they provided the Miners Women's Support Group with £50 worth of food a week.
The Dean you may argue has been lucky there where over 2,500 pub closures last year. Clearly the pressure pubs are under from unsympathetic government policy and greedy pub companies and brewers is immense. In this environment the idea of community owned pubs is firmly back on the agenda it is time to save the ‘Goths’ from the Vandals!

There Really is an Alternative!

2011-03-04T02:55:00.000-08:00

The Tories and their mates in the City are fond of telling us there is no alternative to their world vision. Corporate capitalism has won and we must embrace market fundamentalism at whatever cost to our environment, to our productive economy, to our international relationships or indeed to our relations with one another.

Well despite those Tory doomsayers for the best part of forty years in a disused quarry in mid Wales there has been a place where not only has an alternative future been thought about it has also been demonstrated to work!

Last year with the opening of their newest institute, the Centre for Alternative Technology, was credited with opening the ‘building of the year’ by of all publications the Daily Telegraph!

The new Wales Institute for Sustainable Education (Wise) was described not only as “an extremely worthy building but a ravishingly beautiful one too”. There is no doubt CAT founded in 1973 on the site of the disused Llwyngwern slate quarry near Machynlleth, in Mid Wales has really come of age.

Founder Gerard Morgan-Grenville, was well ahead of our contemporary concerns about the environment when he started the organisation that he conceived as "a project to show the nature of the problem and show ways of going forward."

It was originally a community dedicated to eco-friendly principles and a 'test bed' for new ideas and technologies. In the beginning, progress in the quarry was slow, and the early attempts to raise money were frustrating. Volunteers worked long hours, often by candlelight - there was no electricity on the site at the time.
Well they say it is better to light a candle than to sit in the dark! He had realised that if we are to tackle the threat to the environment we need to completely rethink the way we live and how we make our living. Today as a testament to his vision the centre is a world leader in alternative, environmentally sustainable technology.

What is more Machynlleth is not just the home of a world class centre of education and research it is also the home of one of the world leaders in renewable energy. That business is Dulas, originally spun out from CATS in 1982, the green energy consultancy business now based on the Dyfi Eco Park, near the railway station, began with just 18 staff and a turnover in 2000 of £1.4million today it has over 80 staff and a turnover of £12million plus.

There are few parts of the world today with renewable energy development taking place where you will not find someone from Dulas. It is involved in bringing proven technology to the market place in four main areas, solar photovoltaics, hydropower, biomass and wind energy. It operates throughout the supply chain, from feasibility and resource assessment through to installation, project management, operation and maintenance.

In operating across the world Dulas has, for example, as a solar supplier to the World Health Organisation and Unicef, won numerous awards for its work including being crowned, Company of the Year at the British Renewable Energy Awards in 2009.
At those British Renewable Energy Awards the company was rewarded for its diversity in providing solar DVD players and vaccine refrigeration solutions in Africa through to grid connected PV and hydro power in the UK.

It also won a co-operative enterprise award in 2009. Because as you may have guessed Dulas is a worker co-operative - its workers are also its owners.
They believe that being a worker owned business brings a very high level of commitment and application. They enjoy an open business culture where business development and performance are communicated to all the employee-owners on a company wide basis encouraging high levels of staff retention. They donate up to 3% of company profits each year to charity and invest heavily in staff welfare. Ownership of the business and its success is shared across the whole enterprise.

Modern capitalism has a great deal of sunk costs in the existing ways of doing business, there are a lot of powerful people whose power comes from controlling our access to carbon based energy, and they are working hard to maintain our dependency on their products. You only have to look at our Governments relationships with big oil to see that rather than helping us to wean ourselves off oil they are keen to maintain that dependency.

The technologies being developed at CATS and disseminated by Dulas could if we where smart enough break the embrace of these planet destroying technologies. I am certain that there will very soon be a time when we will be grateful not only for the work they have already done but also for the way in which they are doing it.

The future is not only in decentralised renewable energy but in also workers and community ownership and control of those very energy supplies. The uprisings in the Middle East show that tyrannical rule by kleptocrats is, like the carbon based energy they supply, unsustainable. We have to escape a situation in which every time we turn on our central heating we are propping up the Emir of Qatar. The pressure for alternative energy will grow with the realisation that we will no longer be able to hold down entire populations whilst we steal their energy.
If we are to liberate ourselves from the corruption and environmental damage that comes with big oil and gas Dulas will need to get a lot more work.

Whilst it may only today be a small example of what is possible it’s very existence and its remarkable growth clearly demonstrate that there is an alternative.

Syndicalism: Review Essay

2011-02-24T05:23:00.000-08:00

Syndicalism and Radical Unionism, Socialist History 37.
Published by Rivers Oram Press, 2010.
ISBN 978 1 85489 174 7

Killing No Murder, South Wales and the Great Railway Strike of 1911,
By Robert Griffiths.
With an introduction by Bob Crow, General Secretary of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union.
Published by Manifesto Press, 2009.
ISBN 978 1 907464 01 0

The UK Socialist History Society deserves great credit for dedicating an issue of their journal to the subject of syndicalism. It is a subject that has been short changed in much historical writing about both trade unionism and the working class movement. It sometimes seems that syndicalist ideas are often treated more seriously in mainstream histories than in those which purport to be from a left or socialist perspective.

I found this collection of essays quite uplifting and they certainly shed some light on some key moments in the story of the syndicalist contribution to working class history.

In the opening editorial essay, Ralph Darlington, Professor of Employment Relations at Salford University, points out that the key ideas of revolutionary unionism emerged with the development of capitalism. In Britain from the 1830’s and the Grand National Consolidated Trades Union and Robert Owens proposal for a general strike in the form of a Grand National Holiday syndicalist ideas have arisen at regular intervals.

He points out that the movement faced three ‘paradoxes or dilemmas’: firstly in how much influence it had, secondly, the potential flaw of the limitations of trade unionism within capitalist society, and thirdly of the challenge to syndicalism from communism.

In his contribution to the journal, Alex Gordon, currently President of the Rail Maritime and Transport Union(RMT) here in the UK, our most effective, class conscious and militant trade union, writes about a lesser known English syndicalist, Charles Watkins. In the wake of Britain’s first national railway strike, in 1911, Watkins founded and edited the Syndicalist Railwayman newspaper.

This essay is complementary to the other book I am reviewing an account of the 1911 railway strike as it affected South Wales. This book, written by Robert Griffiths, today the General Secretary of the Communist Party of Britain, does not shy away from the syndicalist nature of that dispute nor does, incidentally, the current general secretary of the railworkers (RMT) in Britain, Bob Crow, who writes an introduction to the book. Both draw important lessons from the dispute which was the last time troops shot and killed strikers on the UK mainland.

Griffiths points out that in studying the history of this period the miners have received most of the attention. This is partly due to the power of the South Wales Miners Federation and its lodges which produced both official and unofficial newspapers. Indeed as Gordon argues one of the few lasting literary monuments of the campaign for industrial unionism was The Miners Next Step published in 1912. Griffiths argues that it is time for the railway workers to take centre stage and I would argue there is much of value in Watkins writings and those he went onto write in Tom Mann’s, The Syndicalist.

Griffiths book was originally produced for a Welsh language TV programme in 1986 under the title of Steic! Streic! Streic! Which as Griffiths suggests needs no translation. The new title of the book ‘Killing No Murder!’ comes from the title of a pamphlet written about the dispute by Keir Hardie in 1912 when he was the Member of Parliament for Merthyr Tydfill. In it, as well as explaining the grievances of the workers, Hardie wrote that he had seen “a degree of class solidarity few believed possible.”

That degree of solidarity was quickly lost as Europe descended into war. Wayne Thorpe, Associate Professor at McMaster University, describes in his essay, International Syndicalists in Europe, 1914-18, how syndicalists across Europe fought a brave but losing battle against the drive to war.

According to Thorpe the syndicalists had four key arguments against war. Firstly, they argued that ‘national’ cultures where not mutually hostile, secondly, they denied that the state was the embodiment of representative culture, thirdly that cultures or nations did not go to war but states did. Fourthly and finally when the war came they highlighted the need for workers movement to mount its struggle on the cultural as well as the economic terrain.

The syndicalist journal Tierra y Libertad in Barcelona predicted in 1915, that; “if the war ended not in generalised revolution but with clear victory for either side, the result would not be peace, but a mere truce of whatever duration the defeated side needed to recoup, raise the flag of cultural defence and strike back.”

How right they where! Reiner Tosstorff, historian at the Johannes Guttenburg University in Mainz has written about the history of the Profintern (the RILU, the Red International of Labour Unions) and has also written about the history of the POUM in the Spanish Civil War. His essay about syndicalist relations with the one country that did undergo a revolution as a result of that war is called Syndicalism and the Bolshevik Revolution.

This essay is a review of the impact on the syndicalist movement of the Bolshevik victory in Russia. Meetings between syndicalists and Bolsheviks only became practical after 1920 with many syndicalist organisations sending delegates to the second Comintern congress in July-August 1920. The syndicalsist where split in how to relate to the Bolsheviks and this split was confirmed at a meeting of syndicalist organisations in Berlin in December 1920.

Despite reservations but not wanting to split the international revolutionary movement almost all of them turned up at the founding congress of the RILU in 1921. The syndicalists where completely outnumbered and despite some doubts broadly gave their support to the communists due to their emphasis on economic and industrial action and on workers control and factory councils. One of the most prominent syndicalist converts to communism was Andres Nin with in the end devastating consequences. Interestingly Trotsky played a role in the discussions between the syndicalists and the Bolsheviks and it was for Trotskyite deviationism that Nin was expelled from the Communists in 1928.

Tosstorrf argues that “it cannot be disputed that former revolutionary syndicalists furnished Stalinism with a ‘proletarian basis and veneer.” There is another interesting point raised by that Tosstorff about the relationship between syndicalism and anarchism. He argues that it was the reaction against communism that drove the syndicalists into the arms of the anarchists. “Sydicalism now found its ideological basis in anarchism to an extent which had not been so determining for pre-war syndicalism.”

He points out that revolutionary syndicalism became anarcho-syndicalism in 1922 with the formation of the International Working Men’s Association which sadly “never became an international based on mass influence.”

The other two essays in this collection Paul Buhle, lecturer at Brown University and author of Wobblies! A Graphic history of the IWW, on Syndicalism in the USA and Gregor Gall, Professor of Industrial relations at Hertfordshire University, on Radical Unionism in Britain cover more familiar terrain. Buhle provides an overview of syndicalist ideas in the US through many movements and organisations, including the IWW and up to the League of revolutionary Black Workers in Detroit in the 1970s.

Gall extends the view from syndicalism to ‘radical’ labour unionism evaluating the limits and potential of such radical movements with analytical and historical comparisons with more moderate forms of trade unionism.

Do these essays help provide answers to Darlingtons dilemmas? Well up to a point. Firstly how much influence did the syndicalists have? Well just here in Britain, as Gordon points out, considering it was such a short flowering, the syndicalist movement “bequeathed the Communist Party of Great Britain its first leadership generations, its most symbolic contribution is said to have been to have driven Sidney and Beatrice Webb to draft the now defunct Clause IV of the Labour party’s constitution in November 1917 as an antidote to pre war syndicalism.”

I have always been a supporter of that Clause IV:

“To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.”

I suppose it does have the sound of the Old Testament about it but is none the worse for that as it is quite beautiful language. It is understandable why it created so much affection in the supporters of the ‘Old’ Labour Party. Sadly there was no attempt by Old Labour (and most certainly not by New Labour which struck it from the constitution) to make any meaningful attempt to fulfill the terms of this commitment. There was precious little support for workers control or even for the tame British Co-operative movement. So the fact they had at least had to pay lip service to these ideas is interesting.

The other legacy of the syndicalist movement was the pressure for trade union amalgamations and federations. The formation of the National Union of Railwaymen, The National Union of Miners and the Transport and General Workers Union began this process. Attempts to form the One Big Union have certainly continued but have sadly been in more recent years pursued from a position of weakness rather than strength.

Syndicalists have in some ways been less compromised by the potential for trade unions to be absorbed into the state than by the social democratic trade unions. Here in the UK the complete cul de sac of social democratic politics has been confirmed by the last Labour Government. Indeed the recent evidence shows that unions like the RMT, which is easily the most militant, is that it is also the fastest growing. Expelled from membership of the Labour Party for supporting candidates from other parties it has returned to the basics of fighting with and for its members in the process making it feared by government whichever party is in office.

There is no doubt, that whilst not the case everywhere, in the UK, despite its small size the Communist Party squeezed out any space to the left of Labour for alternative viewpoints. Many of the leadings syndicalist thinkers and activists and their organisations ended up being absorbed into the Communist Party. On the collapse of the Soviet Union that space on the left was, at least initially, occupied by other well organised tendencies in the communist movement mainly Trotskyists but widespread disillusion with their style of doing politics coupled with a revulsion of parliamentary democracy and a revival in co-operative and green thinking does now, I believe, create fresh space for alternative ideas.

There is no doubt that now is the time for a syndicalist revival. Let us hope that the continued historical re-evaluation of the syndicalist experience contributes to that process.

Firefighters and the Blitz

2011-02-21T06:17:00.000-08:00

Firefighters and the Blitz
By Francis Becket
With an introduction by, Matt Wrack, General Secretary of the Fore Brigades Union.
Published by Merlin Press, 2010, ISBN 978-0-85036-673-0.

The executive council of the Fire Brigades Union are to be congratulated for commissioning this short popular, well illustrated, seventieth memorial to the over one thousand firefighters who died and the many thousands who where injured in the Blitz. There is considerable revisionism in current historical thinking about the home front in the war to which this book adds another chapter.

It is a familiar story of amateurism and class privilege being replaced by professionalism and a structure fit for the huge tasks the war presented, with a great deal of heroism in between. It is astonishing how poorly prepared the service was for war, considering how much of the talk before the war had been about the threat from the air. What’s more it is largely thanks to the FBU that the service evolved into one capable of meeting the challenge.

At the beginning of the war there where 1,600 independent fire brigades each a separate fiefdom run on military lines. Becket says that the Home Office had been thinking about the threat since Hitler came to power in 1933 but it took until 1937 for them to fund fire precautions and improvements in the nations fire fighting services.

Despite the experience from Spain it was not until 1938 that a civilian fire service was formed - the Auxiliary Fire Service. The Fire Brigades Act of 1938, made fire protection compulsory for every local authority in Britain, with the country divided into 11 regions to coordinate resources but there was no extra cash or any reduction in the number of brigades. The biggest the London Fire Brigade had only 106 pumping appliances whilst some of the smallest, controlled by Parish Councils, only had a few part timers and an ancient pump.

In the early part of the war fire fighters tackled some terrifying blazes with large amounts of improvised kit and considerable bravery and stoicism. It was the very toughest of learning environments. Yet it took two years before the government realised the service needed to be unified and it was nationalised in August 1941.

A classic example of the type of bureaucratic bungling was when the London Fire Brigade left its area to tackle a blaze following an air raid on the fuel depots at Thamesdown. On arrival they where told only the local commander could make the request for assistance. “In the absence of a local officer, the order had to go through the regional commissioner for Essex and East Anglia, who was, it turned out, the Master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. Efforts where made to contact this eminent gentleman, the Master [however] had retired for the night and his staff were reluctant to wake him.”

Some improvised equipment was highly successful like the two wheeled trailer pumps that ended up being pulled around by over two thousand London Taxi driver volunteers. This is reminiscent of the mythology of the little boats that saved the day at Dunkirk - heroic certainly but no substitute for a properly equipped and trained service.

If there is a real hero of this story it is John Horner, FBU General Secretary from 1934 until 1964, he battled, with amongst others Herbert Morrison, to modernise and professionalise the service. According to current FBU General Secretary Matt Wrack, he “was the most significant person in the Unions history”. It was Horner who realised how important it was to recruit the members of the auxiliary fire service into the FBU thereby strengthening the unions hand in the formation of a national fire service. Sadly the national service was not retained after the war. It never fails to amaze how politicians of all stripes have the capacity to praise to the skies the work of the emergency services when they are needed and then treat them so badly once the emergency has passed.

The country was woefully prepared for the war and if Hitler had decided to finish us off he almost certainly could have done. He didn’t and we got our second chance but not before many people paid with there lives.

I remember going to see my grandparents in November 1990. When I arrived my grandfather was glued to the local television news. It was the fiftieth anniversary of the devastating attack on Coventry. That night we found out for the first time that he had been working on building hangers for the shadow factory at Ryton near Coventry. The morning after the attack he and his fellow workers where asked to go into town to help clear up the mess and damp down the fires.

Fifty years later he was still traumatised by what he had seen that day. That night 554 people had been killed including 26 firefighters. That was the first time he had told anyone of his experiences, including my grandmother, he was full of praise for the fire crews who had battled all night having come from as far away as London and Peterborough.

There are many lessons to be learned from the experience of the fire service in the Second World War and whilst this book is a splendid introduction I believe the subject is worthy of a much more substantial study.

Time for Some Last Minute Christmas Shopping

2010-12-16T06:21:00.000-08:00

1. A Tree. This Christmas why not plant a tree in the Holy Land? The Olive Co-operative – Trees for Life Campaign plants trees in partnership with the Palestine Fair Trade Association and Zaytoun in places they have been uprooted by illegal Israeli settlers. For just £4 you can sponsor the planting of an olive tree in Palestine. Go to: www.olivecoop.com/stage/trees-for-life

2. A Drop to drink. The Co-operative Group has some excellent fair trade wines for the Christmas dinner table. I recommend the organic Reservea Malbec from the La Riojana Co-op in the Famatina Valley in Argentina. This co-op is the world’s largest maker of fair trade organic wines. The red is a full bodied smooth chocolate 100% Malbec and for a white their 2009 fair trade Pinot Grigio is also pretty good. To help find your nearest shop go to: www.goodwithfood.co.uk

3. A gift for a person with a sweet tooth? Oxfam shops (or the online shop at www.oxfam.org.uk/shop) are stocking a super range of Divine chocolates, from after dinner mints to beautiful selection boxes. Divine chocolates are made with the best quality fair trade cocoa beans from the Kuapa Kokoo co-operative of Ghanaian smallholder farmers which own Divine chocolate (www.divinechocolate.com).

4. How about brightening up your loved ones Christmas wardrobe. CND have some super new very brightly coloured T-shirts with classic CND symbols in stunning new colours. There are also new kid’s t-shirts including some huggable hoodies as well as a range of other peaceful presents. See for yourself at: www.cnduk.org/shop

5. How about some Music. There are some super artists on the co-operative No Masters label, if you want some Christmas music and want to avoid Noddy Holder the Christmas albums by Coope, Boyes and Simpson are for you. See: www.nomasters.co.uk. There has also been some outstanding music on Topic the world’s oldest independent record label formerly the label of the Workers Music Association. I recommend the ‘Gift’ by Eliza Carthy and Norma Waterson or if you want to splash out and hear the whole Topic catalogue try the seventieth anniversary seven CD collection which shows that during the past 70 years, Topic Records has built a deserved reputation for not compromising the nature of its work or that of the independent spirit of the artists it represents. See: www.topicrecords.co.uk

6. How about a trip to the movies. For the film buff visit the BFI film store. (www.bfi.org.uk) Last year the BFI released a restored version of the magnificent Bill Douglas film, ‘Comrades’, about the Tolpuddle Martyrs, but this year I am hoping for ( I hope my partner is reading this) the classic ‘Winstanley’ the 1975 film by Kevin Brownlow and Andrew Mollo, about the Diggers, newly restored by the BFI National Archive. The shop has a terrific selection of classic British and International films together with some stunning documentary films. Of particular interest to Star readers is the ‘Miners Campaign Tapes’ about the great miners strike.

7. Something unusual for the theatre lover. This May saw the members of the New Factory of the Eccentric Actor Theatre Group perform William Morris’s play, ‘The Tables Turned or Nupkins Awakened – a Socialist Interlude’ in the Coach House at Kelmscott House in Hammersmith. First performed at the Socialist League Offices in Farringdon Road in 1887, it is Morris’s only play and this is believed to be the first performance by professional actors. Fortunately the William Morris Society has made this early piece of agit prop available on an audio CD for just £10. see: www.williammorrissociety.org.uk

8. Stuck for a solidarity gift? How about a Cuba Solidarity gift pack! Coffee, cards, music, a Cuban flag brooch, all in a fair-trade bag for just £20! Go to: www.cubaconnect.co.uk

9. Looking for something unusual? Then the online shop that Stella Embliss runs for the Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign is the place for you. A great selection of gifts for children, children’s and adult clothing, jewellery as well as books and cd’s. If you are looking to surprise someone this really is an eclectic collection of fascinating and exciting gifts. Go to: www.nicaraguasc.org.uk

10. Need a stocking filler? Redwords (www.redwords.org.uk) the publishing co-operative have published another beautiful book in their series of Revolutionary Portraits; this one is about the great Soviet composer Shostakovich. Shostakovich, Stalin and Symphonies by Simon Behram can be obtained for just £8.00 from www.bookmarks.co.uk

11. A 2011 Diary has of course to be Housmans Peace Diary incorporating the World Peace Directory. Available either from The Morning Star or from Housmans website together with a selection of thought provoking books. See: www.housmans.com

12. And finally why not send a Morning Star Gift subscription to someone you love who needs to keep in touch! For a half price gift subscription send the details of the intended recipient together with a £15 cheque (made out to the PPPS) to ‘Half Price Offer’. The Morning Star, William Rust House, 52, Beachy Road, London, E3 2NS.

In Praise of the Little Man in the Big Hat

2010-11-17T07:25:00.000-08:00

“Comercio Justo” revives Nicaraguan Co-op’s

For us not a great year, 1979, was the year the Nicaraguan Sandinistas overthrew the brutal Somoza gangster capitalist dictatorship. The Somoza family helped themselves to the nations resources – even the manhole covers in the capital Managua were their private property. The Sandinistas where named after the small man in a big hat, whose image has graced thousands of solidarity t-shirts, Augusto Sandino led the small army of peasants and workers that defied US marines who occupied Nicaragua from 1912 until 1933. Following his example the Sandinistas were committed to improving the lives of ordinary Nicaraguans.

Next month at Latin America 2010 the grandson of the legendary Sandino, Walter Castillo Sandino will speak about his grandfathers’ legacy. Walter and his wife Marbely have written a biography of Augusto and of his importance in the struggle to build Latin American unity.

One policy of the modern Sandinistas was land reform. The transfer of land to the campesinos helped create the modern Nicaraguan co-operative movement. Land reform was not well received in Washington however, triggering the dirty “Contra War”. This illegal covert US intervention did enormous damage to the fabric of the country leading to the deaths of over thirty thousand Nicaraguans.

Worn down from the struggle against the Contras, in 1990, the people elected a right wing coalition lead by Violeta Chamorro which put the country’s farmers under enormous strain. A new wave of co-operative formation occurred in defence of the land the campesinos had gained and to improve access to markets and credit.

In the dark days after the end of the International Coffee agreement which caused the collapse of six banks in Nicaragua the fair trade movement came to the rescue. Thanks to alternative trading organisations in the developed world, like Oxfam, Equal Exchange, Twin Trading and even the Body Shop, (Anita Roddick was a great friend of Nicaragua) the small farmers of Nicaragua gradually became owners of the whole production chain of products like sesame seeds and coffee.

The success, of the co-operative fair-trade sector, did not go un-noticed. After ignoring fair trade for a decade the likes of Nestle, Starbucks, McDonalds and even Walmart decided that if they could not beat it they would join it but for most of them this was a marketing ploy rather than a fundamental change in ideology. The farmers found themselves back in the same set of abusive relationships that had driven them to form co-op’s and take up fair trade in the first place. Fortunately in 2007, the Sandinistas where returned to power just in time to take advantage of a new force in Latin American trade – the “Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra America” – ALBA.

ALBA was formed in reaction to the US attempt to foist a free-trade agreement on Latin America. Nicaragua joined Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Ecuador, the Dominican Republic, Antigua and Barbados, Saint Vincent and the Grenardines, and Honduras. Unsurprisingly Honduras left after the recent coup.

ALBA is committed to “Comercio Justo” or fair trade as well as food security and empowerment. Support is given to small producers of, rice, beans, maize and to raise cattle for the local markets with any surplus being available for export to other ALBA countries.

In Nicaragua ALBA works in partnership with CARUNA (National Rural Cash) which administers the scheme. It receives 25% of the value of the Venezuelan oil company PDVSA’s sales in Nicaragua. With this loan fund CARUNA has lent over £22million dollars to 10,000 small farmers organised in 57 co-operatives. This has supported fishing projects, housing, public transport, micro-enterprises, as well as the improvement of agricultural inputs.

The result was an increase in both the quantity and quality of products as diverse as milk, chicken, bananas and coffee. As the co-operative sector is 70% of Nicaragua’s agricultural economy the impact has been phenomenal. In 2008 the value of Nicaraguan exports was just $27million, rising to $109m in 2009 and set to reach $239m in 2010.

There can be no doubt that the legendary Sandino would approve of this initiative which is liberating the people of Latin America from the backyard of Uncle Sam!

For more information on Latin America 2010 visit: www.latinamericaconference.org

Come On You Reds!

2010-11-08T05:59:00.000-08:00

Who would have thought that former PM Sir John Major would have served as President of a top 100 UK co-operative and who would have thought that co-op would be Surrey County Cricket Club! Playing at the Oval now a superb stadium hosting top international sport and they are not alone, the red rose county, Lancashire is also a co-op.

Fans may wonder why co-operative ownership is good for one famous Old Trafford team while the other suffers under the debt laden ownership of absentee landlords. It does seem strange that when it comes to football, banks will lend money to any reprobate rather than those who really care and are genuinely in it for the long haul – the fans.

What are football clubs for? For rich owners they can be trophy assets or a tax avoidance opportunity. But a vibrant sports club can offer much more than this to the community it serves. Thousands of fans will still be loyal to Liverpool FC years after the current US owners have been and gone. And there is a clear alternative ownership model as cricket shows - co-operative ownership.

There are many variants on mutual ownership across Europe including in the most popular football league in the world the Bundesliga where 50+1% of each club has to be owned by members. Today the poster boys for mutuality are the great Spanish clubs of Real Madrid and Barcelona. It was the renewal of its mutuality that led to the current run of success at Barca. Currently 173,000 fans pay about £160 for their annual membership. As well as supporting world class sport they aim keep their season tickets at the Nou Camp as low as possible – the cheapest adult season ticket is just £77! That’s for a whole season not just one match!

If members don’t like the way the club is being run 5% can trigger a vote of no confidence in the Board. The most recent President, Sandro Rosell, was elected when he won 60% of the 53,000 votes cast by members giving him a mandate the Glaziers could never have.

The financial framework of English football is clearly mad. The profit seeking private ownership model has given clubs huge unsustainable debt, with not enough sugar daddies to go around; loyal fans are super exploited by greedy owners who see them solely as consumers.

A club without fans is clearly unthinkable they are the greatest asset any club could have and is it really so bad for them to have a real say in how their clubs are run? After all when they met in the European Cup Final it was Barca, the club that pays UNICEF 1.5 million Euro’s a year to carry their logo on their shirts that beat the one carrying the logo of a bankrupt US insurance company on its shirts.

You don’t have to go to Spain to support co-operative football. FC United of Manchester formed by alienated Man U fans have steadily climbed the ranks of non-league football. This Friday (November 5th) they play at Rochdale in the 1st Round of the FA Cup. Now five years after their formation they are launching a ground breaking community share issue to help fund a new 5,000 seater stadium at Newton Heath in Manchester. Their planning application is due a decision this month.

They have achieved a great deal without a permanent home and this gives them the chance to show there is a better way to run football by putting supporters at the heart of the game. For more information about FC Uniteds Community share issue, including a prospectus see:
www.fc-utd.co.uk/communityshares. There are many sports clubs that benefit from more supporter involvement, could yours be one? See: http://www.supporters-direct.org/.

Ken Coates 1930-2010

2010-10-26T03:56:00.000-07:00

I have to say I was deeply saddened to hear that Ken Coates, a key voice on the left in Britain for a generation, had died. I had arranged to interview him for the Anarcho-Syndicalist Review but before I could make the trip to his home in Derbyshire I heard the sad news. He occupied an important political space here in the UK firmly on the left in both the peace and labour movements but occupying a firmly syndicalist position.

Why should a reader of ASR be interested in Ken? I would argue his key contribution was his role in the formation of the Institute for Workers Control in 1968. In June this year in one of his last published pieces he outlined his philosophy,

“I have always believed that true socialism will be made by the people themselves, the real beneficiaries. That was the significant achievement of the Institute for Workers Control, because it encouraged people to work out their own ideas about what might constitute democracy in industry. This put paid to Fabian myths about how our teachers always new best, even if that experience was short lived.”

As he said in the introduction to Workers Control (Another World is Possible, Arguments from the Institute for Workers Control, Spokesman, 2003),

“For a number of years the IWC was able to organise widespread discussions on all aspects of industrial democracy, and published dozens of pamphlets and books which helped popularise the idea the idea. Its ideas found their way into the TUC through bargaining courses and into the machinery of collective bargaining, as they were taken up by workers’ representatives.
Under Thatcher, with mass unemployment, anti-union laws and the development of a defensive style of trade unionism, notions of workers’ control were put on the back burner. But they remain as relevant as ever, even if the circumstances in which they will henceforward find application are markedly different.”

Coates writings also won the support for the idea of building a strong sector of worker’s co-operatives and there where some notable experiments that would challenge the dominant method of industrial production. These ideas had a particular impact on amongst others the shop stewards of what was then the Lucas Aerospace Group. They developed plans for alternative socially useful production instead of arms manufacture.

As well as helping workers formulate these types of plans he also helped to reclaim this strand of labour history. The work he did with Tony Topham in researching the early history of the Transport and General Workers Union which he argued was a significant development in the movement for workers’ control. That book The Making of the Labour Movement ( Spokesman1994) , is a magisterial piece of work.

They dedicated it to,

“The memory of the pioneers, who dreamed of One Big Union, and to the success of their heirs, the members of the Transport and General Workers’ Union.”

The fact that the movement for workers’ control goes right back to the beginning of the industrial revolution is well documented in the ‘Readings and Witnesses for Workers’ Control’, Edited by Coates and Topham (Republished by Spokesman 2005).

Once again here and now in 2010, we find, as they say in the introduction to that book “that trade unions have become the bedrock of effective oppositional resistance”. This is certainly the case here in the UK were the Con-Dem coalition government is hell bent on using the current economic crisis to shrink the state and attack the conditions of workers.

This is exactly what Coates predicted in his last editorial for the Spokesman. This will be a tough fight and one that Ken will not be in to share his wisdom and guidance but there will also be new opportunities for workers to take control of their enterprises a demand that continuously rises to the surface.

Ken has the honour and distinction of being expelled from the Labour Party twice!
No wonder when he wrote things like this;

“In Britain, in 1981, three million people will soon be without work. Enterprise is a word which now means inertia and greed. Authority is a widely used synonym for unreasonableness. But private property once meant that “town air is free air”, because the guildsman’s scissors or hammers were the basis of his independent livelihood. Now it means trans-national companies and wholesale displacement of labour. Words change when people change, and we can join our forces to create a vocabulary in which enterprise becomes in truth a shared effort to improvement and mutual care, and authority is understood as un-coerced admiration for example, and nothing more.

Generations of our forebears, in times when windmills were thought to be sophisticated inventions, could imagine a world in which each might grow in the love, care, and effort of others, and all might take uninhibited delight in the achievements of each. Such Utopian thoughts have been unfashionable in an age of lasers, micro-chips and revisionism. But they are stirring again, and however troublesome they may be to media men and entrepreneurs, the sense they make will become apparent to millions of good people”.

(Work-ins, Sit-ins and Industrial Democracy, Ken Coates, Spokesman, 1981).

Twenty years later once again we face the same challenges but thanks to Ken we will know where we are and what we need to do next!

(All the books referred to in this piece are available from: www.spokesmanbooks.com)

Co-operatives and the "Big Society"

2010-10-26T03:38:00.000-07:00

As a co-operator you would probably expect me to argue that every organisation could benefit from being more co-operative, that people are naturally co-operative, that co-operative enterprises are innovative, flexible business models that operate in every sector of the economy. As there are some 800 million members of co-operatives globally, employing 100 million people – more than all the multinational companies put together – I do not need to be convinced that co-operatives are a better way of doing business.

I have to say that internationally, not just here in the UK, the lack of confidence in the welfare state and the lack of trust in the private sector has lead to a renewed interest in co-operative enterprise. Indeed the United Nations General Assembly have designated 2012 the International Year of Co-operatives.

So should I be flattered when the Prime Minister himself argues for more co-operative’s in the economy and goes on to make the case for the transfer of previously state provided public services to the co-op sector?

There is no simple statute in English law on what constitutes a co-operative, indeed currently; we have at least eleven different legal bases for co-operatives in UK law. I maybe looking a gift horse in the mouth but my first instinct is to wonder if David Cameron and I are talking about the same thing.

Clearly there is plenty of room for growth in the sector currently there are only around five thousand co-operative businesses in the UK, even so they have almost 13 million members, employ a quarter of a million people and turnover of £33.5billion. So I am happy to talk to anyone who is genuinely interested in growing the sector.

But are we talking about the same thing? The co-operative identity statement agreed by the International Co-operative Alliance in 1995 says that a co-operative is: An autonomous association of persons united voluntarily to meet their common economic, social and cultural needs and aspirations through a jointly owned and democratically controlled enterprise.

This is derived from the seven some times called the ‘Rochdale’ principles of co-operation, simply put these are:
1. Voluntary and Open Membership.
2. Democratic Member Control.
3. Member Economic Participation.
4. Autonomy and Independence.
5. Education, Training and Information.
6. Co-operation amongst Co-operatives.
7. Concern for Community.

Clearly some of these are more fundamental than others. Firstly, the enterprise has to be autonomous or independent secondly it has to be under democratic member control. This incorporates the one member one vote principle which ensures the business is people rather than capital controlled, next comes member economic participation which follows since members who have an equal vote are likely to allocate surpluses in a fair way. Voluntary and open membership means that people have the opportunity to join of their own free will. I would argue that these four principles are fundamental in creating the structure and principles for a member owned business.

The other principles are desirable rather than essential but just from these principles it is clear that a co-operative is not something that can be created by decree. The transfer of public undertakings into co-operatives, setting aside if such a change is desirable, will be a long drawn out complex procedure.

There is no doubt that internationally from places that would appear to have little in common like Venezuela and Cuba to the UK the scope for co-operative enterprise has never been greater yet it is something of a cliché that for co-operatives you need co-operators. This requires a huge shift in our business culture and our education system, as well as changes to the legal and financial framework for business in the UK. Currently co-operatives are discriminated against in all these areas. Work will be needed across the piece if we are to see a genuine paradigm shift in the proportion of the economy in the co-operative sector.

Also on a practical level we need more support for co-operative business, with better co-operative business, accountancy, banking and legal advice services across the country. In the tradition of self help both Co-operatives UK and the Co-operative Group are doing sterling work in this area but there needs to be more. There are numerous existing businesses with succession challenges, where the necessary shared commitment, common interest and mutual trust exists and like the recent case of Blackwells Bookshops would benefit from a move to co-operative ownership. That transition could be made that much easier if the right advice and support services were available.

2012 can indeed be the year of the co-operative. The co-operative movement can make a significant contribution to the ‘Big Society’ but it needs more than warm words it needs practical action.

An Auster Man for an Austere Age

2010-09-06T02:44:00.000-07:00

Atlee’s Great Contemporaries, Edited by Frank Field, Continuum, 2009.

Review by Nick Matthews

In his review, in the Daily Telegraph, Brian MacArthur suggests that this would be a good summer read for Labour MP’s. Using the character of Clem Atlee as a stick to beat the contemporary Parliamentary Labour Party with would I think be a popular sport. Certainly a greater modesty in character and lifestyle would do them good.

This is a delightful collection of articles published between 1951 and 1966 mainly in the Observer and written in the style of Atlee the statesman, ‘terse, telling and to the point’, as Peter Hennesey puts it in the epilogue. There are three threads running through them Atlee’s relationships with Churchill, the USA and the Labour Party. One should not be fooled by the austere image of Atlee it is just that, an image, no less than the self propagated more flamboyant image of Churchill.

Today we are well aware that a politician’s character and public image can be far apart an increasing gap which has contributed to the public distrust of the whole political class. The editor, Frank Field, suggests that in politics character is all and asks us to compare the character of Atlee and Churchill the books title coming from one of Churchill’s books, ‘Great Contemporaries’ (Implying in Churchill’s case presumably that I am great and these are my contemporaries).

The subtitle is the ‘politics of character’. Field’s thesis, expressed in an introductory essay, is that the key to successful political leadership is character. He quotes Atlee approvingly: “there are many men who find it impossible to believe that men lead men other than by example of moral and physical courage: sympathy, self-discipline, altruism, and superior capacity for hard work”.

Field argues that Atlee drew his sense of “duty, loyalty and responsibility” from his being bought up in the Anglican Church and his belief in Christian ethics. Yet as Kenneth Harris points out in his biography of Atlee one thing he learned at Haileybury was that he did not believe in God: “So far as I was concerned it was mumbo-jumbo.”[1]

So where do Atlee’s ethics come from? Morgan charts Atlee’s intellectual conversion from a young conservative into a socialist, via Carlyle’s study of Chartism, Ruskin’s Unto this Last, and the writings of William Morris. Indeed Atlee’s favourite passage came from A Dream of John Ball,

“Forsooth, brothers. Fellowship is heaven and lack of fellowship is hell, fellowship is life and lack of fellowship is death: and the deeds you do upon this earth it is for fellowships sake ye do them.”

Atlee was a great lover of literature and poetry in particular. One of the most telling pieces, and a great insight into Atlee’s ‘character’, is The Pleasure of Books, in which he describes his library and how much his books, like a collection of old friends, mean to him. He was of the generation that not only enjoyed Morris’s prose but also his poetry which most of us today find hard going. He had few rare books or first editions, for him books were for reading not collecting, but he did have three Morris Kelmscotts, “the gift of some kind friends in the socialist movement, who knew where my love abided.”

One of the reasons Atlee wrote these pieces was because he needed the money to house his library. Atlee had given up his home in 1945 in moving into No 10 because of the housing shortage. Yet sensing his political mortality and looking forward only to a modest pension, as Field puts it, he and Vi sought a new home. “Whatever else this house needed, a primary purpose for Atlee was to house his books”.

Atlee was a complex personality who had risen to be Prime Minister yet in his early political life he could not even get elected to Stepney Borough Council he had certainly done the hard yards as a street corner orator. Discovering in the process the people he most admired, “those who did the tedious jobs, collecting our exiguous subscriptions, trying to sell literature, and carrying the impoverished platform from one street corner to another. They got no glamour. They did not expect to see victory, but uncomplainingly, they worked to try and help the cause.”[2] Maybe he sounds so passionate about the foot soldiers in the movement having been one of them.

He called himself a socialist but of what kind? His ‘socialism’ was as he points out in his autobiography when writing about the ILP, “a way of life rather than an economic dogma”. He believed, like Keir Hardie, that a party formed on the simple object of getting Labour representatives into parliament was “bound in time to become socialist”.[3]

The most telling contributions in this collection which include a large range of pieces are those on Churchill, the wartime generals which reveal his views of the United States and those on Labour figures.

The relationship with Churchill is a theme and certainly he has the measure of him, “He was always looking around for ‘finest hours’ and if one was not immediately available, his impulse was to manufacture one.”(p.161)

In his reviews of the memoirs of Generals Allenbroke, Montgomery and Marshall he lets us know of his views of the USA, he feels they were so obsessed with the British Empire they missed out on the growing Russian one, “The Americans were indeed innocents abroad. It is ironical to reflect when one considers their present attitude to the Communist peril, how much they contributed to its extension westward.”

When it comes to labour there are excellent portraits of Hardie, Lansbury and Bevan but the most telling are the ones about Ernest Bevin. They were a formidable team. Bevin was for Atlee the embodiment of a “Labour representative in parliament”.

In, A Man of Power, in this collection he points out that , “The main thing that Bevin did for the Labour movement was to create and harness power for it, and by constantly stating the trades unions point of view keep the Labour Party’s feet on the ground.” It makes one wonder what the point is of the modern Labour Party and on what exactly its feet are placed.

We should not be fooled by Attlee’s apparent modesty he was well aware of his worth and intelligence. As Christopher Hollis observed, “In a world in which so many people pretend to be more important than they are, the British people has, I think, shown its wisdom and generosity in taking to its heart a man who spends his time pretending to be less important than he his.”[4]

[1] Atlee, Kenneth Harris, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1982,p10
[2] Atlee, Kenneth Harris, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1982, p33.
[3] As It Happened, C.R.Atlee, William Heinemann, 1954 p33&34.
[4] Atlee, Kenneth Harris, Weidenfeld and Nicholson, London, 1982, p553.

Socialist Register 2010: Morbid Symptoms

2010-06-07T07:05:00.000-07:00

Morbid Symptoms, Health Under Capitalism, Socialist Register, 2010. Edited by Leo Panitch and Colin Leys. Merlin Press, London, Monthly Review Press, New York and Fernwood Publishing Halifax. 2009.

Confuse and Conceal: The NHS and Independent Sector Treatment Centres, Stewart Player and Colin Leys, Merlin Press, 2008.

The Spirit Level, Why Equality is Better for Everyone, Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, Allen Lane, 2009.

Nick Matthews

This, the 46th edition of the Socialist Register, is quite an achievement for a left publication of this quality. 2010 also marks the fiftieth anniversary of the New Left Review, both publications were born out of the post war new left. This was a rebellion led predominantly by intellectuals who found their followers in the huge post-war expansion of the universities. It is unsurprising therefore that the format of these journals follow that of the academic journal.

The New Left Review was the result of the coming together of the New Reasoner and the Universities and Left Review. The Reasoner was a product of dissident communist voices drawn largely from the distinguished British Communist historians group whilst the ULR drew its support from those growing Universities. The publisher of the Register, the Merlin Press, had been started by Martin Eve in 1956 (a very significant year in the creation of the New left with the Soviet invasion of Hungary) a time when many intellectuals had left or been pushed out of the Communist Party as a vehicle for the new left. The first Socialist Register, published in 1964 was born of a split in the original editorial team of the New Left Review in 1963.

That could be caricatured as an ideological split between experience, the socialist humanism of E.P.Thompson and youth, the continental Marxism of Perry Anderson. Martin Eve wanted to recreate the New Reasoner and asked E.P Thompson to join with Ralph Milliband and John Saville (who became the joint editors) on the editorial board of the Register. He declined however as he said he was exhausted from the editorship of the New`Reasoner. The Register always had an international flavour with a relationship with the Monthly Review its current joint publisher from the beginning.

The title Register was taken from William Cobbett’s (1762-1835) the Weekly Political Register showing the historical continuity the new publication sought to draw upon. Cobbett, was an early radical voice for democracy and he used his Register to make his case.

“When all newspapers were viewed with suspicion, it was not surprising that working-class newspapers were considered especially dangerous. In particular radical papers like Cobbett’s Weekly Political Register and Wooler’s Black Dwarf (1817-24) were condemned for trying to turn simple people into dupes ‘of the basest and most profligate of men’. Before the ‘gagging acts’ were passed Cobbett fled to America in 1817 – he returned carrying the bones of Tom Paine two years later – and there were such incidents as a Shropshire magistrate ordering two men to be ‘well flogged at the whipping post’, (under the Vagrancy Act) for distributing copies of Cobbett’s Register”. Asa Briggs, England in the Age of Improvement 1783-1867, Longmans, 1959.

So almost 50 years on does the Register still carry the genes of its inheritance? In the preface the new editors, Leo Panitch and Colin Leys, quote John Saville on why he joined the Communist Party in 1934, “For young intellectuals with any generosity of sprit there were additional factors beyond the poverty of so many of their own people, and the brutalities of fascism. Bourgeois society was under increasing criticism for its callousness, greed and cultural emptiness.”

Having lived through a UK general election during which these characteristics have been on show in abundance there is no doubt that under whatever party contemporary capitalism continues to be deeply ingrained with “callousness, greed and cultural emptiness”.

For the contemporary editors the predominant theme of the Register for the last 15 years has been a critique of neo-liberal globalisation.

This volume explores that process on “the most important area of human life: health. All the elements of public health, from a balanced diet to decent housing, job security and job satisfaction are crucial in determining how well and how long people live. This is partly a matter of giving the human body what it needs to reach its full potential, but is also a matter of preventing disease and to a lesser extent of curing illnesses. The turn that capitalism has taken in recent decades has, in both these respects been replete with Morbid Symptoms”.

This is a very impressive collection of essays (seventeen in total) which collectively give a comprehensive picture of the global healthcare “industry” including contributions about, China, Cuba, India, and Africa as well as the developed world. They set out to articulate the struggle between commodification and solidarity in health care provision.

The opening essay by Colin Leys (Health, Health Care and Capitalism) is a particularly good opening shot encompassing many of the issues explored in greater depth in the other essays. If you find you are pressed for time this essay alone is worth reading.

His key point is that contrary to conventional wisdom “that capitalism is responsible for the huge improvements in health that have occurred over the last century and quarter” there is considerable evidence that poorer countries often have better health than rich ones.

The fact is that the rich countries have reached the limits of what capitalist economic growth can do for us. The cartoons of Cobbett’s day or indeed the early Wobblies always showed the rich as fat and the poor as thin yet in today’s rich societies it is the poor that are fat and the rich that are thin!

We have always known that in capitalist societies the poor had worse health than the rich but it is now apparent that in deeply unequal societies life expectancy is reduced for both the poor and the rich! There is a wonderful resource for this argument in Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett’s book (The Sprit Level, Allen Lane, 2009), they have demonstrated from a huge study of all the available data “how almost everything – from life expectancy to mental illness, violence to illiteracy – is affected not by how wealthy a society is, but how equal it is”.

This is borne out by the way the food industry works in contemporary capitalism when everyone could get a healthy diet and yet the industry generates both obesity and hunger as Robert Albritton points out in his contribution to the Register (Between Obesity and Hunger: The Capitalist Food Industry). The private health industry unsurprisingly works in much the same way. Large parts of the developed world’s health industry simply exploit our fears and insecurities like any other part of consumer capitalism contributing little or nothing to improved levels of health.

The health industry also has “a history of struggles for control of the work involved. These struggles have been highly gendered and racialised as well as class-based”, this can be seen on any visit to a major hospital as Pat and Hugh Armstrong show in their contribution to the Register (Contradictions at Work: Struggles for Control in Canadian Health Care).

One essay in the Register I found disappointing was the one on the way the health care industry is presented in TV medical dramas. (Lesley Henderson, Medical TV dramas: health care as soap opera). Doctors and nurses have been a mainstay of TV light entertainment since its inception and yet the impact of the way medicine and health care is presented to the viewers is little understood. It would seem to me that they have greatly contributed to the ‘medicalisation’ of problems that are essentially social and economic in nature. The author admits that, “On the whole, therefore, contemporary audiences are neither educated about the health care system nor invited to become engaged in health policy debates”. Is this a surprise as these programs are soap operas, maybe above average quality soaps, like ER, but soaps nonetheless ie designed to sell soap or today unnecessary medical products and procedures!

This essay feels lightweight compared to Kalman Applbaum’s contribution to the Register on the marketing of healthcare (Marketing of Global Healthcare: The Practices of Big Pharma). Applbaum shows that marketing drives the overconsumption of pharmaceuticals in affluent countries by what is known in the industry as strategic medicalisation or “what some writers call disease mongering”. This is coupled with a secondary but none the less important phenomenon that of ‘strategic pharmceuticalisation’ – the use of drugs to treat most ailments.

In countries where drugs have to go through rigorous cost benefit analysis before public health authorities make them available to patients the drug industry are expert at whipping up public fears to fast track drugs so that Doctors can prescribe them at what ever cost to the public purse.

This also distorts the type of research and product development that the pharmaceutical companies undertake. Whilst they develop expensive placebos for western consumers, “most of the rest of the world suffer from diseases whose incidence would be dramatically reduced if they had access to the medicines already in use in the West fifty years ago.”

Julian Tudor Hart’s contribution to the Register, (Mental Health in a Sick Society: What are people for?) shows how capitalism drives us mad. I cannot say I am surprised it has been driving me mad for years. I was reminded of John Ruskin’s comment, “We have much studied and much perfected of late the great civilised invention of the division of labour; only we give it a false name. It is not, truly speaking, the labour that is divided; but the men - Divided into mere segments of men – broken into small fragments and crumbs of life; so that all the little piece of intelligence that is left in man is not enough to make a pin.” (John Ruskin, The Nature of Gothic 1853)

There is no doubt in Europe that in search of profits the private sector is desperately trying to get a share of state healthcare budgets and in the United States the Obama administration is seems to be trying to spread the cost of healthcare away from businesses and across the population more generally. The collapse of the US car industry for example seems to owe much to the legacy heath care costs of tens of thousands of former employees. The US system must be benefiting someone other than its patients as it is the least efficient anywhere in the world costing twice as much per capita yet leaving 50 million people uninsured placing the US near the bottom of the league table for many of the key heath indicators.

As Christoph Herman points out in his contribution to the Register (The Marketisation of Health Care in Europe) European healthcare systems fall into two types, whilst both are based on public planning and to a large extent based on services delivered by public organisations, they are funded in different ways. One model the German or Bismark model based on social insurance deducted from salaries was begun by the German Chanceller in the nineteenth century and the other is the Beveridge model or the British model is funded by tax revenue. William Beveridge was the mastermind behind the reorganisation of the British welfare system in 1945.

Most countries in Europe have adopted one model of the other and they have proved to be remarkably resilient and very popular. Despite this the growing costs of healthcare have driven all governments to try and involve the private sector in the provision of healthcare. The process has varied but in most cases it has been by the commoditisation of basic healthcare activities and the outsourcing of them to the private sector.

Herman points out that “the effect of the reforms has been not so much a reduction in costs as a shift from public to private healthcare spending. Increasing healthcare costs – in most countries the proportion of GDP spent on health care has continued to increase – are not considered a problem as long as they do not weigh on public budgets”.

The politicians then are keen to introduce private providers into the state system without frightening the public. Collusion between politicians and the private health industry to get a share of the public spending on health in the UK is highlighted in a short report, Confuse and Conceal: The NHS and Independent Sector Treatment Centres, Stewart Player and Colin Leys, Merlin 2008.

The ISTC program was presented to the public in Britain as a way of using the private sector to shorten waiting times for elective surgery and diagnostic tests and increasing patient ‘choice’.

Choice is the great nonsense in the British health debate leading to increasing marketisation and privatisation. The choice that is being offered is not that of treating the patient as an equal participant in the design of their healthcare but that of having the choice between a commodified procedure undertaken in a public or a private space.

Restrictions on the capacity of the public healthcare system are being used to drive patients into the private sector. Further a patient has to be in the position to be able to exercise any choice. In complex cases patients have to rely on expert opinion and in an emergency having a ‘choice’ is not the first thing that comes to mind. In many private sector hospitals in the UK if the patients’ condition gets too difficult they are handed back to the public hospitals.
Many of the criticisms of state healthcare provision about, bureaucracy and industrialisation of healthcare which originally came from the left are now being used by the right to drive marketisation or patient ‘choice’. We all know however who has the real choice in a market situation. Any perceived choice in public health care provision has always been exploited by the articulate middle classes and the so-called ‘worried-well’ as Leys points out, Julian Tudor Harts famous ‘inverse care law’ tends to hold – the amount of health care given is inversely related to the need for it.

Re-reading some of the pre-war arguments which lead to the formation of European state run health care systems today they do sound rather authoritarian with the feel of eugenicist about them. Something that has been forgotten in the Left’s defence of state healthcare provision is that prior to nationalisation there was a small but significant socially owned and worker managed health care sector. For example before World War Two the South Wales Miners Federation had a strong concern for the medical care of its members. The Miners Welfare Commission was founded in 1920, funded by miners and mine owners by 1923 it had established the Talygarn Convalescent home. It became a Miners Rehabilitation Centre in 1943 earning a world-wide reputation for its treatment of injured miners before being taken over by the Ministry of Health in 1951. (See: The Fed, a History of the South Wales Miners Federation in the twentieth Century, Hywel Francis and David Smith, Lawrence and Wishart, 1980).

Reading this Socialist Register it seems that the mainstream left has become locked into defending the welfare state from marketisation and can no longer see the possibility of welfare without the state.

As the late Colin Ward has pointed out (Anarchy in Action, Colin Ward, Freedom Press, 1988) we may, “conclude that there is an essential paradox in the fact that the state whose symbols are the policeman, the jailor and the solider should have become the administrator and organiser of social welfare. The connection between warfare and welfare is in fact very close. Until late in the nineteenth century the state conducted its wars with professional soldiers and mercenaries, but the increasing scope of wars forced states to pay more and more attention to the physical quality of recruits.”

Ward argues that the biggest challenge for modern health care provision is that of institutionalisation. Ward argued that,” When we compare the Victorian antecedents of our public institutions with the organs of working-class mutual aid in the same period the very names speak volumes. On the one side is the Workhouse, the Poor-Law Infirmary, The National Society for the Education of the Poor in Accordance with the Principles of the Established Church; and on the other, the Friendly Society, the Sick Club, the Co-operative Society, the Trade Union. One represents the tradition pf fraternal and autonomous associations springing up from below, the other that of authoritarian institutions directed form above.”

We can see that this institutionalisation is a cradle to the grave affair. Childbirth itself has become institutionalised to an almost industrial scale with women struggling against huge bureaucracy to avoid the birthing factories and give birth in their own homes. The needs of the ‘institution’ come ahead of the mother. The situation is no better at the other end of the spectrum when it comes to looking after the elderly and end of life care.

Ward argues that an anarchist approach would be clear - the breakdown of institutions into small units in the wider society, based on self-help and mutual support, like Synanon or Alcoholics Anonymous, or the many other supportive groups of this kind which have sprung up outside the official machinery of social welfare.

This is of course the exact opposite of the way modern health care is moving as the needs of increasingly large and complex technology and pharmacy are creating larger and ever more centralised hospitals. As they become more dependent on private providers for equipment and drugs is it surprising that European Hospitals become ever more ripe for privatisation?

As modern consumer capitalism makes more of us sick this is itself a market opportunity. Rodney Loeppky points out in his contribution to the Register (Certain Wealth: Accumulation in the Health Industry) worldwide health spending reached $4.5 trillion in 2006. $2trillion was accounted for by the US and US spending is set to reach $3.5 trillion by 2014. This is not an industry responding to the demands of patients. Rising costs are regularly blamed on an aging population but the steady growth of the elderly cannot explain the vast explosion in health spending.

Health care has become a ‘growth sector’ in most OECD economies and its growth is universally treated as a good thing. Loeppky asks how much health is enough? This is a crucial question given that all the indicators tell us that life expectancy in the advanced societies has reached a plateau.

There are glimmers of hope like the work the IWW is doing to keep the market out of the UK Blood Transfusion Service. This is a service based on pure social solidarity people freely give blood not knowing whom it will benefit.

After all as Colin Ward reminds us, a multiplicity of mutual aid organisations amongst, claimants, patients, victims, represents the most potent lever for change in transforming the welfare state into a genuine welfare society, in turning community care into a caring community.
You will not be flogged for reading and distributing this Register but it does contribute to the debate about how we care for the sick or injured members of society. Is care to be based on solidarity or the market?

We Sell Our Time No More

2010-03-08T07:38:00.000-08:00

Book Review: We Sell Our Time No More: Workers’ Struggles Against Lean production in the British Car Industry. Paul Stewart, Mike Richardson, Andy Danford, Ken Murphy. Tony Richardson and Vicki Wass. Pluto Press 2009. (£14.99 Direct from Pluto)

I had a call recently from the fund raisers at Keele University, where I studied Industrial Relations, some years ago. When they asked for some loot I replied, “Why should I support an institution that has turned a world class centre for the study of industrial relations into a mediocre business school? As far as I am concerned human resource management is one step away from the return of slavery.” The caller didn’t stay long.

So you can see where I am coming from. “We Sell Our Time No More”, is a quote from a T&G convener at Vauxhall-GMs Elsmere Port Plant, PeterTitherington; “Under the piece work rate system we directly sold the fruits of our labour. Under Measured Day Work we sold our time. Under lean we sell our time no more. Under lean, management determine our labour input and our time with a vengeance. Or at least that’s their aim.”

Given the state of academic IR this book is a bit a rarity a few years before Keeles destruction without any sense of irony the LSE (founded of course by the Webbs' amongst the earliest students of modern IR) had put their IR into management! Against this tide of destruction this work is a welcome demonstration of the importance of the discipline.

The research for the book was coordinated through the Auto Workers Research Network, established to study the impact of ‘lean production’ on the health and working conditions of car workers by Paul Stuart (co-author of the Nissan Enigma- flexibility at work in a local economy- with Philip Garrahan in 1992). The book contains details of the introduction of these new management techniques into the industry and the trade unions response to them at Vauxhall-GM and Rover/BMW. The most substantial part of the book are the round table discussions with shop stewards and the challenges they have faced in struggling against some of the idiocies of this management methodology.

There is one area I tend to disagree with in that it plays down the importance of the deskilling effect of the introduction of new technologies and the better management information it provides. This is a minor criticism in what is a valuable book. The book reminded me of the 1960’s study by Goldthorpe and Lockwood of affluent workers in Luton (The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure) that contributed to the ‘embourgeoisement thesis’. The idea that we are all middle class now!

There is no doubt that as part of the neo-liberal roll back of the gains workers have made HRM and lean employment methodology are now not just an issue for manual workers they have penetrated into all areas of work including into the public sector. Indeed in education the parceling up of work and the introduction of short term contracts is leading to the proletarianisation of previously ‘middle class’ models of employment leading to de-skilling and de-professionalization with the collapse of any worker autonomy.

When I studied IR one of the most useful concepts was that coined by American Carter L.Goodrich back in 1920. In his study of British Coalmining – A Study in British Workshop Politics he coined the idea of the frontier of control. There is no doubt that with lean methods and HRM management that frontier has been driven in managements favour. In the name of 'flexibility' (for whom?) there has been a transferring of costs on to workers much to the detriment of their health, wealth and general well-being. This book helps us understand how that has come about and contributes to the battle to drive the frontier back.

The Co-op Party - Ready to Face the Future

2009-10-07T02:27:00.000-07:00

The current Conservative Party Conference marks the end of the round of political conferences as the last before a general election their pronouncements are more significant than usual. With the horror show of the Tory conference dominating the headlines it is easy to forget the Party that kicked the conference season off – the Co-operative Party. Mind the grim prospect of a Conservative Government with its attacks on the poor, the sick and the old does tend to concentrate the mind with its parade of ghastly injustice. To see Cameron and Osborne make the poor and weak pay for the sins of the rich and powerful is particularly sick.

The fact that the public sector is the only thing preventing the current recession turning into a depression seems to have escaped politicians from all the major parties who seem to be in an “who can beat up most on the public sector” contest.

So maybe in these grim circumstances it is understandable that we have forgotten all the good ideas that came out of the Co-op Party. I discussed the conference and the current state of the Co-op Party with Richard Bickle, Co-op Party NEC member and Secretary of the Society for Co-op Studies. For a young man Richard is something of a co-op treasure with his vast knowledge and enthusiasm for all things co-operative.

NM: Richard, the Co-op party started the current round of Party conferences north of the border in Edinburgh what was the mood?

RB: I found the mood generally upbeat and encouraging. Despite the challenging position that the Government finds itself in, there was a real sense that our time (as co-operators) has arrived. The manifesto [A Co-operative Agenda for a Fourth Term] is the most comprehensive statement of Co-operative Political Policy for many years, if ever, and Government ministers who spoke such as Douglas Alexander do appear to have 'got it' as far as the value of co-operation is concerned.

NM: With the Labour Party struggling in the polls and struggling for finance how many candidates will the Co-op Party be supporting at the forthcoming General Election?

RB: With a record number of MP’s standing down the Co-op Party list has been re-opened for a limited period of time. This is likely to result in a number of additional Co-op candidates in winnable seats. It’s too early to say exactly how many candidates we will be fielding in the election, but the objective is to maintain the current strength within parliament after the next election as far as possible.

NM: After a year-and-a-half long process and the input of hundreds of Party members, the Party has published its manifesto for the General Election. What do you consider to be the highlights?

RB: The most important thing for me is the comprehensiveness of the vision being offered. In terms of specific policies, I am encouraged by the practical and timely nature of the remutualisation campaign for the failed banks and by the new mutual model for domestic energy purchasing covered in detail in a pamphlet also published at the conference. This is a practical tool for changing the energy market which doesn't require Government action but is rooted in local collective self-help.

NM: If the Labour party only took up a couple of issues to include in their manifesto which would you like to see?

RB: Can I have three?

- The remutualisation of the failed banks;
- A serious commitment to prioritise the development of co-operative housing;
- Giving employees in failed firms a right of first refusal to take on ownership and management.

NM: The Co-op sector has had a new lease of life with the damage done to the global economy by the conventional shareholder business model why do you think some co-operators still do not see the Co-op Party as their political voice?

RB: The long-standing electoral agreement with the Labour Party tends to mean that the Co-operative Party is opposed by supporters of other parties. There is also a tradition of party neutrality that goes back to the Rochdale Pioneers ("Political and Religious neutrality" was amongst the original Rochdale Principles) which still has advocates today. This tradition worries about the potentially destructive effect of factionalism on boards and committees, and of the need for co-operative businesses to be able to serve the supporters of all parties and none.

NM: If Labour suffers defeat in the forthcoming general election, like Labour, the Co-op Party will be in for a period of rebuilding, is it up for it?

RB: Yes, definitely. I have been a member for the last 15 years and it has more life and vitality now than at any time I can remember.

NM: Clearly Richard these are your views and do not represent the Co-op Party or the Society for Co-op Studies but thanks for your time. Morning Star readers will find much they can agree with in the Co-op Manifesto, including the case for a land value tax, as well as some things they will be less supportive of. What is clear is that with new Labour running out of ideological steam there is much of substance in the Co-op Party manifesto for the Labour party to get its teeth into. Why not take a look at: www.party.coop

The Lessons of Longbridge

2009-10-01T05:21:00.000-07:00

In 2000 on Regional TV I was asked what the prospects for MG Rover would be with the Phoenix Four. I said that British Aerospace, one of the world’s largest engineering businesses, could not make it work and BMW, one of the world’s best carmakers could not make it work. I saw little hope that four blokes from Birmingham with an overdraft could make it work.

As you might expect I was both right and wrong. Right about their chances of building a successful car maker but wrong about their need for an overdraft. BMW’s largesse meant they made a great success of the business for themselves taking, according to the recently published report, over £42 million out of the business without taking any risks whatsoever.

It is incredible that these men burned their way through some two and half billion pounds! To take an inheritance from BMW of around £1.2 billion in assets and cash and turn it into a loss of £1.3 billion really takes some doing. As a result around £5billion has left the Regional economy leaving it reeling. Add to this the closure of Peugeot near Coventry, the collapse of LDV in Washwood Heath and now the threat to one of Jaguar Land Rovers plants in the region and is it any wonder that the West Midlands is the national unemployment black spot.

It now seems unless there is a dramatic change in Government policy the West Midlands has little future in automotive manufacturing. This is the result of a whole series of calamitous decisions handing MG Rover on a plate to the Phoenix 4 being just one. The death sentence on Longbridge was announced in 1998 when the Rover Group was sold by the Thatcher Government to British Aerospace. BAe had no real interest in volume car manufacture but did have an interest in Land Rover. At least given Rovers engineering weaknesses it had the sense to form a partnership with Honda.

In 1994 they sold the business to BMW for £800 million in theory making a profit having bought Rover for just £150 million from HM Government but one suspects they were happy to be rid. BMW’s purchase was at the time a defensive action. With BMW threatened with takeover needing a strategic acquisition to be bigger.

The rest as they say is history. BMW could not make any money out of Longbridge. Despite investment in new models, the Mini at Cowley and the Range Rover at Solihull, at Longbridge the wrong product in the form of the Rover 75 came too late to save the plant. This too was partly due to Government policy. For many years cars of this type were bought as a perk for their employees by companies thanks to the structure of company car taxation. Older readers will remember our motorways being full of Vauxhall Cavaliers, Ford Cortina’s and big Rovers all looking much the same with reps jackets flapping on hangers in the back. When the tax benefits disappeared and individuals started making their own car choices the trickle of hot hatchbacks from mainland Europe became a flood. Leaving Dagenham, Luton and Longbridge tooled up to build cars no one wanted. Unlike Rover, Ford and GM could bring into the UK models from their plants elsewhere in Europe sentencing their UK plants to death.

So what are the lessons of this sorry tale?

1. There is no substitute for a Government with an active long term industrial strategy. Most economies of our size try to maintain a mixed economy, in terms of services, manufacturing, energy and agriculture. This requires more than supply side initiatives or high spending on science. It requires a fiscal policy that favours investment over short term speculation and ensuring access to markets that are large enough to support large scale enterprises.

It is not just since Gordon Brown gave the Bank of England its independence that the economy has been run in favour of the money lenders but the way the monetary policy committee operates does not help. They do not have to take into account the effect on investment or on the value of the pound of their decisons. High interest rates have made it harder for businesses to invest in the UK and an uncompetitive exchange rate has made it hard for firms to export. The strong pound has a double effect it is harder to export but easier for those based in euroland to sell us their products. I am not arguing for joining the euro (although it would help) but if we stay outside we need at the very least a more competitive currency.

2. Ownership matters. The government should never have dumped Rover onto BAe. The lasses faire approach to the ownership of major businesses in Britain will come back to haunt us. Compare for example the French Governments approach to Renault. Here was a company that made a successful small (car its mini being the Renault 5) and like Austin Rover it could not make money out of manufacturing it. When it got into financial difficulties the French Government stepped in nationalising it in 1984. After making a huge investment in Renault and in its suppliers, completely restructured it was returned it to private sector in 1996. But here is the telling point. The French Government still maintains a fifteen per cent stake in Renault and even more tellingly from the point of view of the Rouge Roberto’s who work on the tracks (members no doubt of the CGT) three members of the main board are elected by employees and another is elected by employee shareholders. Such a board structure means four directors could not have run off with the workers redundancy money and pensions. Of course the proof of the pudding is in the eating and so at year end 2008 Renault had produced 2,382,230 cars and employed 129,068 people whilst weeds were growing through the rubble of Longbridge.

3. Manufacturing can only survive as part of a more general technological economy. The UK prides itself on its excellence in science. Science of itself however does not make money. Scientific breakthroughs are easy to copy because they are published; so that even Iran can split an atom or put a satellite into orbit. No. Money is made from technology. There is little new science in mobile phones, computers or modern cars. The science is pretty much old hat. There have been developments in new materials and miniaturisation but much of the science in modern products is half a century old. What we need for a vibrant manufacturing economy is an undergrowth of small and medium sized technology businesses. These are the firms that exploit new materials and new technologies first. Government spends a lot of money on science but needs to support the development of small technology businesses.

4. We do not need any more engineers or more children doing more engineering or science in school. We do need more demand for engineers. A manufacturing economy is driven by investment, new investment drives the development of new products, and new product development drives R&D and the acquisition of new skills. Too many businesses have learned half the lesson of the Japanese lean manufacturing philosophy. The constant pressure on costs. Obviously if you have a successful product and want to maximise profits you must keep pressure on costs. But any long term successful business also needs a constant stream of new products. Too many UK engineering and manufacturing businesses are just too lean they have little or no new product development and as soon as their product base gets stale they then get taken over or close all together.

5. There is real need for changes in company law. Firstly on board structures. Although why the trade unions who had made such an effort to get MG Rover for the Phoenix Four did not demand at least a seat on the board is beyond me. There are also issues about insolvency law and the law about pensions. We need to take these issues seriously. In retrospect it would have been better to have closed Longbridge and used BMW’s dowry to pay off the suppliers and the workers. It can never be right for Directors to be able to walk away as millionaires at the expense of their suppliers and workers.

6. It is never too late. Korea and the other Asian tigers developed as manufacturing economies from next to nothing. We can be better at manufacturing which would do wonders for our trade balance and the economy generally. It would also be good for our society. The collapse of manufacturing has huge social consequences changing our society into a less equal more divided one.

So let us hope this is not just another chapter in the history of decline of British industry. Manufacturing does matter and an active government can make a real difference.

Co-ops and the Battle Against Poverty in Venezuela

2009-09-11T06:11:00.001-07:00

This year’s conference of the Society for Co-op Studies took place at its spiritual home of Ruskin College. Its model of working class education and spirit of enquiry fit closely with the society’s ethos. The conference theme was ‘Building a Co-operative Economy – Opportunities and Challenges’ and there is certainly a feeling amongst co-operators that the global capitalist crisis could be a huge co-operative opportunity.

One of the liveliest sessions was, ‘Empowerment through Co-operation in Venezuela’. Lead by Sabine Kienzl, “I am an Austrian by passport but a Venezuelan in my heart”, she said. Now at the LSE she first went to study micro-finance in Columbia and Bolivia supported by the Austrian Government but whilst there had witnessed the astonishing changes of the Bolivarian Revolution leading to her working with the Venezuelans to build links between the Social Economy sector in the United States and Venezuela and undertaking research in the Co-operative sector.

She pointed out that when Hugo Chavez came to power there had been only 910 co-op’s in Venezuela. Whilst just over 50% of the population lived in poverty and over 20% in extreme poverty. By 2007 there where 228,004 co-operative enterprises comprising 14 % of Venezuela’s GDP and 18 % of employment and poverty levels had been reduced to 33.6 % and those living in extreme poverty reduced to 9.6 %.

In sharing this vast increase in the number of co-op’s with the audience there was a collective gasp. UK co-op development bodies would be delighted with registering a single new co-op in a month. All this reduction in poverty cannot be put down to the rise of the co-op sector however it has made a significant contribution. How had this vast increase in co-op activity come about?

When in 2001, the “Special Law of Co-operative Associations” gave the State the responsibility for the promotion of co-op’s through education, improved access to finance, tax exemptions and their prioritization in public contracting. President Chávez argued that the social economy “brings together economic and social interests and gains strength from the dynamism in local communities and the participation of citizens and workers.” The rise began in earnest with actions to implement this law in 2003.

The key education role was taken up by the social missions. Misión Vuelvan Caras, renamed Misión Che Guevara in 2007 took technical education, in agriculture, tourism or construction, and classes on what the Social Economy was all about out to the people. Over 670,000 have been through these programs with their alumni creating over 10,000 new co-op’s.

Simultaneously a new co-op model was developed, the Social Production Enterprise (EPS), which reinvests a proportion of its profits back into the community. Today EPS’s have won some 30% of the value of supply contracts with state owned enterprises. Meanwhile the state-owned oil company, PDVSA took a key role by ensuring that 10% of its investment went into a social fund that is used for projects in education, health, infrastructure and the social missions.

PDVSA also made it a priority to “democratize” its supplier base. By opening up to small co-op’s, at the end of 2007, its suppliers included more than 3,000 EPS’s. It also introduced a program to identify supplier opportunities, a standardized EPS registration system, and an “EPS School” educating them how to do business with PDVSA and other government bodies. Once an EPS wins a contract it commits itself to contributing 3% of its profits to the Social Fund, providing yet further investment.

Alvaro Sanchez from the Venezuela Embassy explained how the development of participatory forms of democracy through the community councils had been a key driver in the development of the co-op sector. The people themselves had identified the needs of their own communities and had then set about creating the co-operative tools to tackle those problems.

It seemed appropriate that this discussion of bottom up decision making and grassroots democracy should have been taking place in the Raphael Samuel Room. Here was something that I would have hoped Raphael would whole heartedly approve, history being made from below. Mind as you would expect from co-operators some where sceptical of the role of the state in this exponential growth whilst others had reservations about Hugo Chavez.

Veteran Co-operator, Edgar Parnell, who many feel wrote the bible when it comes to the building of co-operative enterprises in the developing world made a particularly pertinent and measured contribution to the debate. He described the challenges of sustaining this astonishing level of co-operative development from his experiences in Botswana and Bangladesh. But his most telling comment was about the time he worked on the development of co-operatives on the sugar plantations of Jamaica during the Premiership of the charismatic Michael Manley.

He told delegates not to underestimate the challenges that the Venezuelans faced in building this alternative social and economic model and reminded them of the dirty tricks and destabilisation attempts that the CIA and the United States in collaboration with the large land owners had played in Jamaica to try and thwart their efforts at land reform and the building of a viable co-operative sector. In congratulating the Venezuelans on what they had achieved he said the challenges of sustaining such fast growth in the sector should not be underestimated.

Whilst a vibrant co-operative sector is not the only thing necessary for a more just society as President Chávez has said: “We must transcend capitalism [since] it is impossible, within the framework of the capitalist system to solve the serious problems of poverty of the majority of the world’s population.”

The Co-op Making the News

2009-08-03T07:21:00.000-07:00

Like many of its readers I have shares in the Society that publishes the Morning Star. I also have a share in, according to Bonner’s history of British Co-operation, the ‘oldest working class and democratically owned newspaper in existence.’

That paper, first published on September 2nd 1871, is the Co-operative News. Its early days marked with “turmoil and agitation” saw it constantly in debt to its printers, the Co-operative Printing Society, the first of its type (if you will excuse the pun) formed of printers mainly from what was the Manchester Guardian.

Despite its difficult early life it won some influential readers, the Cambridge economist, Alfred Marshall, described it as, “the best pennyworth of news in the United Kingdom”.

The News, has been one of the few constants in the Co-operative movement charting all its ups and downs. All specialist titles face a constant fight for revenue and readers yet, like the Morning Star, it has adapted to the modern age with a strong presence on the web.

Today Co-operative Press shareholders include consumer co-operative societies, trade unions and since July 2004 (for just a tenner) individuals. It made a small surplus in the year ended February 2009.

Bob Bowman the current managing editor is determined to ensure that the fortnightly Co-op News remains essential reading for those interested in the sector. Like Co-operatives UK, the umbrella body of the Co-op movement, he has widened the breath of its contributors from across the co-operative, mutual and social enterprise sectors.

It is important that there is a space for the movement to talk to itself, about new opportunities and challenges and to celebrate the co-operative and mutual advantage to a wider world.

With the Co-op movement having an estimated turnover of £29billion there is plenty of business for the News to talk about. Despite being the ‘industry’ paper it does not avoid the big co-op issues. In a recent editorial Bob took on two of the most controversial issues facing the movement, that of whether there should be a single co-op retail society and the question of whether the best way for the co-op movement to have political influence is by running its own political party.

To hear some co-operators talk of the need for single co-op retail society is like listening to Francis Fukuyama talk of the ‘end of history’. In a healthy co-operative economy new co-op’s will be formed and ones that no longer serve their customers will be die. The important thing is for the rate of creation to exceed the rate of extinction so that the sector grows. Even if we had a single retail society it would not be the end of ‘history’ merely the beginning of a new phase.

Some of today’s fastest growing and innovative co-op’s are in sectors we could not have imagined a few years ago way beyond traditional co-op activities like food retailing. They are in renewable energy and telecoms, organic foodstuffs and even in cycle retailing! A single co-op retail society could only ever be a proportion of co-op retailing and the beginning of a whole new set of co-operative relationships.

When it comes to co-op politics, at its September conference, the Co-op Party will have to show there is life after New Labour. As the obvious weaknesses and contradictions in shareholder capitalism have become apparent the Co-op movement has had a new lease of life resulting in it being courted by the Liberals and the Tories.

Ideological renewal is vital as deregulated capital takes New Labour down with it. In a booming economy New Labour could both satisfy the rich and redistribute a modest amount to the poor. But as an ideological formation it can now be seen as a child of the boom. Now we face the inevitable bust the Co-op Party must show it has the ideological resources to survive as an independent force?

With the co-op sector in robust health these questions and more will be debated in Co-op News. Let us hope that as back in 1883 when the Co-op Woman’s Guild, grew from a column (Alice Ackland’s ‘The Women’s Corner’) in the paper, new activities and opportunities will grow from the voices, ideas and arguments within its pages for many years to come.

To subscribe to the Co-operative News go to: www.thenews.coop

Management and Motivation @ Co-ops 2009

2009-07-13T02:52:00.000-07:00

A great debate at Co-operatives 2009 ran through the whole day starting in the Employee Participation and Engagement Workshop, continued into the Co-op Studies fringe meeting, rattled around the coffee bar and exhibition space and was still going at dinner.

It was whether the Suma Wholefoods flat pay structure could be a model for the movement. Bob Cannel of Suma explained that,

“We operate a democratic system of management that isn’t tied to a conventional hierarchy. Using an elected Management Committee to implement decisions and business plans, decisions that need the consent of every co-op member given at general meetings – there’s no chief executive, no managing director and no company chairman.”

“Working at Suma the workers must show initiative and be self-motivated, supporting one other in collective teams. Fulfilling regular daily tasks and being part of the management is a new skill which new members have to learn, whether their previous experience is on the shopfloor or in management”.

Having grown consistently for 30 years Suma believes that their success is based on all the members sharing responsibility. But the rub is all workers are paid the same net daily wage.

This flat pay scale is a good annual wage of around £25,000 for manual warehouse workers but is less attractive for conventional management grades. For Suma workers this pay reflects the collective management element and overall wage costs are industry average.

Bob says, “Multiskilling and equal pay underpins our operations; it allows us to use labour more efficiently to cope with the troughs and peaks, keeps people fresh and enthusiastic and it allows recuperation from stress. You can spend time throwing sacks in the warehouse after leaving a high responsibility position and then re-enter the fray in a different job.”

With employee anger at the huge rewards for failure in the banking collapse many find merit in the Suma model. But this is a recurring theme in management theory.

Is organisational efficiency driven by processes or people? If by process you need very smart (and expensive) people to design the processes, if by people you need highly skilled and motivated staff.

The idea that free individuals are more productive than slaves is not new. Indeed when Napoleon ruled most of Europe he argued it was because every one of his soldiers carried a marshal’s baton in his knapsack.

Suma workers are certainly free individuals, well educated and highly motivated. Their business model is one in which decisions are taken close to the point where issues arise and intelligence is evenly distributed across the system. Job variety means everyone has an awareness of the issues others face. With this business culture imposing any kind of ‘chief’ would be like trying to herd cats.

This raises questions for other co-ops. I find the term Human Resource Management makes me think of robots as a lot of HRM business thinking has come from Japanese manufacturing where process is paramount. Shorthand for this is the term ‘lean’ based on keeping constant pressure on costs.

A crude version of lean has been imported into Britain by our Business Schools, with all its subsets like, Just in Time, Total Quality Management or World Class Manufacturing attempting to guarantee success by a focus on process design.

Businesses that copy these methods almost always fail to achieve Japanese results because they only copy half the process. The other side of lean is about a continuous improvement, new product development and innovation. In the Japanese case hard to copy as this takes place in faraway Japan.

It is this creative side of the process which needs the anarchic atmosphere of a Suma. New ideas and radical innovation do not come from robots, from slaves to a system.
Also workers who just do what they are told when faced with a shock to the system are incapable of doing anything about it.

In the co-op sector we know that individual initiative in the workplace makes a huge impact to the bottom line. Having intelligence distributed across a system encouraging flexibility and problem solving close to the shop floor is good for business. No matter how talented a senior management team or effective a board of directors they would be swamped if they had to make every decision. Even the best designed business systems are abstractions of reality which means that ‘stuff happens’ and people have to deal with that ‘stuff’.

A balance has to be struck between people and process but importing corporate attitudes into co-ops is not the way. When new technology was driving industrial success Robert Owen saw the most important part of the business was the human behind the machine. “If due care as to the state of your inanimate machines can produce such beneficial results, what may not be expected if you devote equal attention to your vital machines, which are far more wonderfully constructed.”

The new buzz in management education is leadership but as Napoleons story shows without a well motivated and highly skilled army even the greatest leaders cannot guarantee victory.

The Answer is Blowing in the Wind

2009-07-13T02:46:00.000-07:00

Roy Bailey and Tony Benn performed their, “Writing on the Wall” show, at this years Levellers day in Burford and if there is an issue where the writing is on the wall it is in the subject for discussion that day - the coming energy poverty crisis.

In a fit of free-market zealotry, when energy appeared to be plentiful, the UK pursued an everything must go privatisation policy - from electricity, gas, coal, nuclear and oil nothing was safe even the wires and pipelines went with the promise of low prices from competition.

Now we can see where this deluded strategy has lead us as we face the twin crises of energy security and climate change. New Labour Ministers often tell us ‘ownership does not matter’, seeing the powerless PM last summer, begging for hand outs from these global megacorps to pay for lagging for pensioners shows the nonsense of this view. Not only are we paying more for our energy we are also suffering from underinvestment in all forms of energy generation.

As for renewables forget it! The global giants refuse to invest in UK renewables as they seek higher short term profits from investments overseas. No wonder the UK is facing a looming energy gap.

Compare us to Portugal, with no indigenous carbon energy sources, it now obtains over half its energy from renewables. Having invested in wave power – technology developed here in Scotland – renewable energy that you can set your watch by.

Locked into free-market dogma progress on renewables in the UK is pitiful. It is not just the investment strike by the energy giants we have failed to give a lift to small scale renewables development with preferential feed in tariffs giving them the certainty they need for investment.

The lack of investment in our privatised energy infrastructure has prevented what some say is the rational development away from large scale, wasteful industrial scale energy production, towards a decentralised model producing energy closer to where it is needed using new technologies.

Despite the challenges to small scale energy projects there are today some exciting co-operative developments in renewables. One does not have to travel far across the countryside nowadays to see campaign posters against wind turbines

This resistance to private sector wind development can be overcome if the wind farms are owned by the communities in which they sit. Energy4All represented at Burford by John Malone was formed by Bay wind Energy Co-operative to promote community owned energy co-operatives.

Bay wind an Industrial & Provident Society, was formed in 1996 to allow a Cumbrian community to invest in a local wind farm. The original board of directors included 7 members of the community from Ulverston and Barrow. The first share offer in 1996/97 raised 1.2 million to buy two turbines at the Harlock Hill wind farm. In 1998/99 the second share offer raised a further £670,000 to buy one turbine at the Haverigg II wind farm site. Preference was shown for local investors, so that the community shares the economic benefits from their local wind farm. Around 40% of existing Baywind shareholders live either in Cumbria or North Lancashire with a wider number from the Northwest Region.

To date Energy4All has promoted seven community owned energy co-ops in England and another seven in Scotland. Speaking at Burford, John Malone said “Energy4All was created due to daily enquiries received by Baywind Co-operative from people looking to replicate the success of Baywind, the UK's first community-owned wind farm. Baywind co-op has generated enough green electricity to power 1,300 homes a year whilst paying an attractive return to its 1,350 members (averaging 7% per annum), and supporting local initiatives, such as the Baywind Energy Conservation Trust. Owning a wind farm increases awareness of and involvement in renewable energy developments, maximises financial returns from local resources, and mobilises environmental concern.”

No one thinks that wind of itself is the solution to our all our energy needs but anything that gets us out of the clutches of the global power giants and contributes to tackling the crisis we face is important. The largest Energy4All co-operative is Westmill Wind Farm in Oxfordshire. Officially opened by Jonathan Porritt of Friends of the Earth in May 2008, Westmill consists of five 1.3MW turbines, capable of generating sufficient electricity to power the equivalent of 2,500 homes. Over £4.4 million of share capital was raised from its 2,382 members, through community investment, who collectively own and control it.

The scale of the challenge is such we need to maximise all of our indigenous energy options. We need therefore to go much further. When oil was discovered in the North Sea, there was a realisation that it was going to be a long term risky business bringing it to shore, we established a public sector business to undertake this challenge -The British National Oil Corporation.

If we are to take on the challenge of developing a renewables industry particularly in the capital intensive wave and tide power arena we will need a similar public sector champion. We need a British National Renewables Corporation.

Unlike the wind you can set your watch by the tides around Britain’s coast and if the Portuguese can do it so can we. With a global shortage of credit we cannot wait for the private sector to come to the rescue.

If we want a significant renewables sector we need co-operatives but we also need a large scale public sector engagement.

If your community wants to investigate its own renewable energy scheme visit: www.energy4all.co.uk

Nothing too good for the workers!

2009-05-20T03:53:00.000-07:00

It is not everyday you get the chance to become a shareholder in a stately home! On the May Day Bank Holiday I was with friends at the wonderful Chesterfield TUC May Day festival with its combination of a march, speeches, first class entertainment and solidarity market stalls.

One stall caught my eye. I had first been to Wortley Hall longer ago than I like to admit it was the venue for the weekend schools of the old Midland Section of the Co-op Party. So I was delighted to see a stall for the upgraded Wortley Hall.

Wortley Hall, between Sheffield and Huddersfield, set in 26 acres of formal gardens and woodlands, is the Workers Stately Home having belonged to the labour movement for over fifty years. Originally the ancestral home of the Earls of Wharncliffe, we cannot be exact about when the hall was built but we know that Sir Thomas Wortley, born in 1440, lived at the Manor Wortley until 1510.

Sir Thomas, on the wrong side during the English Civil War, was taken by Parliamentary forces to the Tower of London. The hall fell into decay until the mid eighteenth century when Edmund Wortley commissioned its rebuilding. The family’s new wealth coming from coal mining in the South Yorkshire area, during the war the Hall was occupied by the Army, but after 1945 the hall once again fell into decline.

This all changed at a meeting in May 1950. Vin Williams, a former miner, proposed to local labour movement activists that Wortley Hall should become an education and recreation home for workers who would be the owners and on whose behalf the Hall would be run.

It was in semi-derelict condition and it took a great deal of voluntary work of South Yorkshire supporters to carry out repairs and restoration but on May 5th 1951 it was opened as an education and holiday centre for the trade union, labour and co-operative movement.

For over fifty odd years, successive generations have maintained the commitment and built on the sacrifices of those workers to keep Wortley Hall as the Workers Stately Home. Support has been drawn from across the labour movement, no one person or organisation can have overall control of the Hall, a member of the Co-op Union and registered as a Friendly Society. Wortley Hall has always been run on co-operative principles.

Today, with four stars from the English Tourist Board, the Hall is looking better than ever. The effort that has gone into bringing the accommodation and grounds up to the very highest standards has really paid off. The grounds laid out in an Italinate style on an eastward facing slope enjoy magnificent views over the vale of Worsborough are absolutely glorious.

The Hall can host conferences for up to 150 delegates, with seven conference rooms and 49 en-suite bedrooms, all equipped with direct telephone lines and internet connections. The most recent to be upgraded is the ballroom, paid for mainly by Unite branches, will be formerly re-opened as the Unite Ballroom later in the year.

Another recent development has been the creation of two holiday cottages set in the old stable yard. The area has some excellent cycling and walking as the Hall is not far from the Peak District and for those wishing to travel further afield there is the ‘last of the summer wine country’ of Holmfirth.

The grounds are also the home of the South Yorkshire Festival, celebrating workers worldwide, which takes place on Saturday 4th July this year, an excellent day out, in a delightful setting. If you are a member of a Trade Union, Labour or Co-operative organisation you are eligible to become an individual shareholder. This entitles you to participate in the running of Wortley Hall, attending the AGM, voting for the Management Board or standing for election having been nominated by your organisation or another shareholder.

Organisations and individuals can apply for shares which are in £5 units. So for a small sum you can have a share in the Workers Stately Home! For more information go to: www.wortleyhall.org.uk

Well Done Wolves!

2009-05-05T02:15:00.000-07:00

I must say I was delighted that Wolverhampton Wanderers won the 1st Division Championship. My delight was strictly for the fans! As someone who was a Wolves season ticket holder for many years and having lived in Wolverhampton I know how important the club is to the identity of the town.

When I was a fan they where riding highish in Division 1 - well top half of the table we had a good side in the early seventies (from memory, Parkes, Parkin Shaw, Bailey,Munro,McCall,Hibbit, Mcalliog, Richrds, Dougan, Wagsaffe) which did not have the success they deserved - and then I had the misfortune to follow them down to the fourth division and back to the present Championship.

The strong fan base the club have deserved a moment of success for all the support they have given the club. After years of having managers who said this club is too big for the championship they seem to have last had a manager who tried to win the division the club was actually in rather than assuming that promotion was a formality.

It is rather sad however that they will be changing places with West Bromwich Albion as it would have been good to have the Black Country derby games in the premier ship.

When I was a kid I lived on the Yew Tree Estate in what is now Sandwell and would go to Wolves, Albion and Walsall to watch the football. Mind in those days it was a cheap afternoon out!

Those where the days of Astle and Dougan, Alan Buckley and Mike Bailey, Bomber Brown and Waggy! We didn't realise that we where experiencing a golden age for Midlands football! Highlighted on Star Soccer with Stoke, Blues, Villa, Albion, Leicester, Derby and Notts Forest all brightening Sunday afternoon with Huge Onds! As we called the commentator Huw Johns!

Sadly modern football is no longer my thing. But nonetheless I wish the Wolves the very best.

Does rural Britain have to be a no go area for the left?

2009-05-05T02:09:00.000-07:00

Every summer I like me to spend sometime visiting delightful rural spots to thank those who came before us in building our movement. I listen to fiery radical speeches of labour struggles of days gone by. I am not alone many of you will have been to places like Tolpuddle in Dorset or Burston in Norfolk home of the famous strike school or maybe to Burford in the Cotswolds to mark Levellers day.

There was a time when the left held its own in rural areas and there was the Country Standard in which to read about the struggles of working class rural dwellers and we had something to say to rural communities.

With the collapse in house prices and economic changes generating huge increases in food prices it is now time for us on the left to think again about rural life and the agricultural sector. Just because agricultural policy is the property of the European Union does not means that we have to give up thinking about what the shape and type of agriculture we should have here in the UK.

Despite being true blue on the electoral map ironically rural Britain is a bastion of the co-operative movement. The erosion of the co-operative sector in the cities has not been matched in agriculture where co-operation seems to have gone from strength to strength.

Each year Co-operatives UK publish an overview of the UK co-operative economy with a table of the UK’s top 100 co-operatives. At least half of them are agricultural co-ops.

The retail Co-op itself began farming in 1896 when it bought its first farm to grow spuds for its stores and a big expansion took place between the wars when food was scarce so it should be no surprise to find that the Co-op is the UK’s largest farmer with 70,000 acres across England and Scotland.

There are at least ten agricultural co-ops with a turn over of more than £100 million! There are some real giants like the Dairy Farmers of Britain Co-operative with two thousand farmer members turning over half a billion pounds. This in some way reflects the consolidation of the sector with the severe challenges the agricultural economy has faced over the last few years with poor prices and terrible weather that put farm incomes under massive strain.

The collapse in rural farm work has contributed to the pressure to close rural schools and post offices, although there are still around 135,000 workers employed in agriculture in the UK.

In fact the Rural and Allied Workers Trade Group of Unite continues to represent workers with the Agricultural Wages Board as well as in the growing sectors of horticulture and forestry. Many of the problems of rural work, of migrant labour and gang masters would have been familiar to Thomas Hardy and the Tolpuddle Martyrs.

There are still many opportunities for co-op’s and social enterprises to contribute to the rural economy as the Plunkett Foundation which provide seed corn finance and advice to support the start up and development of rural co-ops and social enterprises have shown. This helps the growth of small scale businesses such as community shops for example which large scale business is simply not interested in.

Successive UK Governments have followed a policy of managed decline reflecting their attitude both to the manufacturing and agricultural sectors here in Britain however with global warming affecting production the issue of food security will soon become a real one. We will face the challenge of having to put more land under cultivation, as well as issues such as that of low carbon agriculture, the hopes of organic farming, animal welfare and movement as well as the impact of climate change on soil quality.

With DEFRA seeming to believe that the UK can import huge quantities of food out of the mouths of those in the developing world for evermore. Frankly I feel the government have given too much ground to the Countryside Alliance. We have been lead on a huge wild fox chase over country sports whilst missing out on the real debate over the future of the land over which the chase takes place.

UK agriculture is a vitally important asset to our country and it needs to be expanded and developed not sentenced to lingering death under the common agricultural policy. I do not believe a one size fits all agricultural policy is appropriate in these changed circumstances and this is another vital issue that NO2EU - Yes to Democracy should be raising in the European Elections.

What is good for GM is good for America!

2009-04-30T03:24:00.000-07:00

I see in todays paper that General Motors is to be nationalised. And the main shareholders in Chysler are to be the United Auto Workers Union.

I wonder if in 1955, when the then Chairman and CEO of General Motors, Charlie Wilson, said: "What is good for General Motors is good for America." This is what he had in mind.

From the NICE Decade to the Sticky Brown Stuff

2009-04-30T03:11:00.000-07:00

I wrote in Tribune on the 15th June 2007. I argued that Britain could not survive simply as a low tax deregulated financial centre. I said at the end of my piece that, “We could not live beyond our means on this scale forever. The end will surely come with a massive devaluation of the pound or a recession.”

I was wrong. It wasn’t either/or it was both! As the nice decade well a truly ends we are to face at least a decade of austerity. This economic mess has been caused by three things that we are ill equipped to cope with. Let’s face it we would have struggled with a simple down turn. There are still large parts of the country that have seen little from the boom years that benefited the few not the many!

Secondly the “credit crunch” the collapse of the secondary banking system will hurt us deeply because finacial services are a much bigger share of our economy (and an important contributor to our trade balance) than any other major economy.

I suspect the Treasury, having taken control of a large proportion of the banking system, has not done the sensible thing and separated retail banking from investment banking because they feel they may kill the Goose. They hope that our Investment Banking will rise from the ashes.

This I fear underestimates the third factor that will be the most significant element in the current crash. That is the fundamental restructuring of the global economy that is underway. With the most obvious sign being the G8 becoming the G20.

When Brazilian President Lula was humiliating Gordon Brown for the crimes of the white people who had been lecturing Latin America on financial prudence he was doing so from a position of strength. That day the market capitalisation of the Brazilian banks was larger than that of the UK banks.

Whilst we spend a decade digging ourselves out of the sticky Brown stuff this fundamental restructuring of the global economy will continue apace with China, India and Brazil growing at rates we can only dream of.

The Tory response to this is sadly predictable. No recognition that they where the original architects of the edifice that has now collapsed, the ones who laid the dodgy foundations.

No their answer is thrift! As if simply cutting spending would generate growth. Of course we have to live within our means. But the challenge we now face is to grow those means!

Once Gordon Brown knew he had to increase the growth rate of the UK economy. That was before he became a convert to neoliberal orthodoxy. It was his post neo-classical endogenous growth theory phase. He seems to have given up on endogenous growth a) because Michael Hesletine had a pop at him in the Commons commenting on a Brown speech that “Its not Brown its Balls”! (Gordon does like being laughed at).

And b) because when in office the only apparent vehicle for endogenous growth seemed to be a Prescott idea of regional development agencies. Stillborn underpowered and under funded bodies that have made little impact.

This does not mean the idea of increasing endogenous growth, essentially internally generated growth is a bad one, far from it this is the most important thing we can do. We have growing amounts of resource in our economy lying idle, people, land and machinery. The missing ingredient is capital.

That is why we have to continue to spend. Of course we must rebalance public spending and there will be cuts. There will have to be a reduction in spending on prestige projects like in defence, on foreign wars and an end to Britain’s nuclear weapons, spending on the Olympics will have to be scaled back, daft PFI ideas in education, health and transport will have to go and almost certainly the ID cards computer disaster that is just waiting to happen.

In areas where investment increases the competitiveness of the economy public spending will have to increase to compensate for the lack of private investment. Obvious examples are housing – a huge public sector house building programme needs to start now and we need to use the downturn to increase the capacity of the railways and to complete the electrification of all the major routes.

We also need to make huge investments in our energy infrastructure, from clean coal, nuclear, gas and all the renewables, especially wave and tidal. And we cannot afford to cut back on further and higher education. None of this is cheap. Our task is to increase the output of the economy not to just make cuts and hope.

Thrift sounds sensible when it comes to individual households. For the national economy it will lead to inexorable decline and a whole decade of thrift will see the newly industrialised countries over the hill and out of sight.

WITH HOUSING IN CRISIS CAN CO-OP’S TAKE THE STRAIN?

2009-04-07T08:03:00.000-07:00

It was shocking to follow the saga of the Home Secretaries domestic arrangements. Hubby at home in Redditch watching porn whilst she was in, her ‘main’ home, her sisters back bedroom in London!

Whilst cabinet ministers are busy making do with two (or even three) homes at the taxpayer’s expense they are unlikely to want to reform Britain’s housing system. In what other job can you build up equity in a second home that you can sell tax free when your job ends!

They say the global banking crisis has its roots in an unsustainable housing model in the US sub-prime sector. Gordon Brown was quick to blame our difficulties on the US – except when President Obama was in town then he is nauseatingly obsequious - but here in Britain we have our very own sub-prime disaster.

The single biggest privatisation of the Thatcher years was not the utilities or the nationalised industries but the sale of our council housing stock. A privatisation that gave the original tenants a windfall gain, a house at less than market value. But that has over time seen a large transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.

The propaganda that houses could only go up in value meant home ownership gave millions, many of whom had never had any debts an asset against which to build up huge debt. Collectively that mountain is now unsupportable with £1.2 trillion of housing debt and £1.4 trillion of total debt equivalent to the annual output of the UK economy.

Rather than creating a viable housing system Government policy has lead to disaster - the standstill in house building making this the worst housing crisis since the Second World War.

Back to Jacqui Smith, her Redditch constituency contains the largest new build housing Co-op in the UK. Redditch Co-operative Homes is a great success for those who live in its houses but with only 200 it can only make a small contribution to solving the housing crisis.

The UK Co-op Housing sector consists of some 35,000 homes in around 650 co-operatives sounds large but there are about 25 million homes in the UK. So why is the co-op sector after twelve years of Labour Government still so small?

One would not expect a party that felt here was no such thing as society to see the social benefits of housing co-operation. The increase in social cohesion and stronger communities is well documented in co-op’s. The 1988 Housing Act which introduced the current funding regime of a mixture of grants and private finance meant that large housing associations with strong management and a substantial asset base cleaned up most of what was a relatively small budget.

The sad fact is that Labour has done little to support co-op’s whether deliberately or as a sad side effect of its obsession with all things private the result is the same the registration of new co-ops virtually dried up in the mid 1990’s.

The Government through the Housing Corporation was only interested in a business model of housing management. Nic Liss, chair of the Confederation of Housing Co-op’s says that as the regulator the Housing Corporation simply had no interest in tenant involvement. Of course for that involvement to be meaningful a co-op does have to be relatively small so that members can have real control over their property.

The effect has been that today even the United States with 6,400 co-ops with 425,000 homes has a bigger co-op housing sector than the UK. Other countries also have significant co-op housing sectors, such as Germany (2.2million homes), Sweden (750,000), Norway (750,000), Austria (334,000), Canada (92,000) and Turkey with (1.4M). So how can we build a more substantial co-operative housing sector?

That is the remit of the independent Commission on Co-operative and Mutual Housing. Chaired by Adrian Coles, Director General of the Building Societies Association, it aims is to build the evidence for a long term strategic framework for the growth and management of the sector.

What changes in the law, taxation and general attitudes are needed to foster a growing co-op housing sector? The truth is that much of our housing policy and law is distinctly feudal in character after all what does the term ‘landlord’ imply? The very best landlords have often been local councils although as a council tenant for many years I know councils, even some run by socialists, do not always make good landlords!

Time to abolish landlordism I say!

For more information on the Commission on Co-operative and Mutual Housing go to: www.cch.coop or www.humancity.org

Open Letter To Co-op: Time to Boycott Israel

2009-04-07T08:00:00.000-07:00

Like many co-operators I have been delighted with the run of good news about the Co-op Group and co-operatives of late. The decision to put ethics at the centre of our branding following the example of the Co-op Bank has proved to be a master stroke. Now at a time of recession when trust, such a vital comment of any retailer’s relations with its customers, is at a premium it could really come into its own. We have seen some stunning marketing of late making all co-operators proud of the whole co-operative ethic.

Our role in the fair trade movement has been exemplary and the range and quality of fair trade products sold in our stores is second to none. I was especially pleased given the difficulties the producers face that we are to begin selling Palestinian fair trade olive oil sourced from co-operative sources in some of our stores from the end of March. Olive oil exports are a vital ingredient in the viability of a future Palestinian state.

This brings me to the black spot on this fine record. I fully appreciate that we in the British Co-operative movement have long standing relationships with the Israeli Co-operative movement directly with co-operative organisations in Israel and through the ICA. Indeed there was a time when Israel seemed to be pursuing the kind of democratic socialism, many of us had dreamed of, with the Kibbutz movement, the Histradut and the co-operative movement it looked like a genuine ‘promised land’.

Many people in the 1950’s and 60’s looked to Israel like some had looked to the Soviet Union in the 1930’s. Now we have to face the sad fact that we where wrong. The recent attacks on Gaza and the elections in Israel have produced really shocking results. The complaint from Israel for many years was that they had no one to negotiate with now it is the Palestinians who have no one to negotiate with.

In January Len Wardle, Co-operative Group chair, wrote:

"The Co-operative Group board has decided to suspend sourcing products from illegal West Bank settlements. However, we will continue to trade with Israel and will seek to develop trading links with Palestinian farmers. The Co-operative Group only rarely curtails trade with particular countries or regions. However, in the case of the illegal settlement in the Israeli controlled occupied territories, it has proven to be all but impossible to ensure that supplies derived from the region are not perpetuating injustice and unfair terms of trade. We will no longer source dates, grapes and a number of herbs from the illegal West Bank settlements and will be phasing out the use of similar items from our own brand products."

Full marks then for developing links with Palestinian farmers and as Somerfield has sold products from the occupied territories at least we can put a stop to that but is our position tenable? With no end in sight to the occupation and settlements growing how can we be asked to police produce labelled as Israel is not come from settlements in the occupied territories?

If as Len points out “it has proven to be all but impossible to ensure that supplies derived from the region are not perpetuating injustice and unfair terms of trade”.
There is only one ethical course of action. There are numerous examples of mislabelling of produce we can not be asked to police this ourselves and in a way this misses the point. It is Israel that is undertaking an occupation that has gone on for far too long and we should therefore admit sadly that we have to stop sourcing produce from Israel whilst the occupation continues. Anything less would be hypocritical and would be undermining our own ethical principles.

In many ways we dragged our feet on apartheid South Africa lets us not make that mistake again.

The Hippy Co-op Comes of Age.

2009-03-16T06:00:00.000-07:00

The collapse of confidence in conventional business models has drawn new attention to co-operative and mutual alternatives. More people are expressing an interest in worker owned co-op’s than ever before. In last years Co-op UK’s annual review of the Co-op economy the top performing worker co-op in the country was the Triangle Wholefoods Collective Ltd with a turnover of £24 million.

Triangle probably better known under its brand name of Suma is in some ways a caricature of a workers co-op! With its commitment to total worker equality and passion for organic, vegetarian and ethical products it’s like the “good life” turned into a business.

The Northern Co-operative Wholesale Society that went on to become the CWS was formed in 1863. Suma is the 21st century equivalent!

Reg Taylor already had experience of whole foods in London before he moved to Leeds and opened a retail shop, Plain Grain. He realised that if other whole food shops got together and worked co-operatively they could get a better deal for their customers.

Suma was started in August 1975 by Reg at a meeting attended by whole food shops, 8th Day, from Manchester; Alligator, York; Single Step, Lancaster; Maggie’s Farm, Durham; and Down to Earth, from Sheffield. They established a whole foods wholesaling co-op in order to supply each other.

Demand grew quickly and Triangle was registered as a common ownership workers co-op in 1977. Today Suma is a highly respected independent wholesaler of health and whole foods. Operating since, 2001 from its own large purpose-built warehouse in Elland, near Halifax it distributes over 7,000 different products to some 2,500 supermarkets, small retailers, caterers, hospitals, schools and prisons.

Suma’s ethics drive the way the business operates with a hundred plus multi-skilled workers who own a share of the business, all paid the same basic wage with allowances reflecting different work patterns and hours. They all usually do more than one job in any week. A driver, for example, will drive for three days and work in the warehouse for the other two, office staff too carry out manual tasks for one day a week.

There is no chief executive and any employee can put a proposal forward for consideration by the committee. The ethics also drive the activities of the business as they are as organic, green, vegetarian and fairly traded as they can make it going to considerable trouble to fulfil these objectives. Suma has grown consistently since 1974 and thrives in a fiercely competitive market by providing a better service to its customers and better jobs for its workers.

Suma are careful that when you buy a banded as well as their own brand products that each and every product has been chosen as much for its all round quality as for its vegetarian, ethical and health promoting credentials.

They are consistent innovators with a large range of own brand products. Suma was a pioneer of recycled toilet tissue and dairy free margarine. It avoids the “pills and potions” end of the healthfood market concentrating on recognised alternative remedies and was in the 1980’s an early importer of fair-trade coffee. I am particularly fond of its organic beers its Penumbra stout is particularly tasty!

Further it refuses to stock and distribute products from countries where human rights are known to be abused. The business has changed considerable over the years but, changes are democratically agreed and supported by the membership, not imposed by management and paid for by the workers. As we all get more conscious of the quality and provenance of what we buy Suma is ahead of the market.

They may sell lentils and look like hippies but Suma is a great co-operative success story and as they say “Suma is, at heart, a political statement that workers can successfully manage their own businesses without an owner/manager elite”.

See: www.suma.coop

Fairtrade Palestinian olive oil is being stocked in Co-op stores —
Good news on our campaign to get Palestinian olive oil into mainstream supermarkets. The Equal Exchange Fairtrade Palestinian Extra Virgin Olive Oil that is the first Palestinian product to receive Fairtrade certification will be available in around 300 Co-op stores from March 22nd at £5.99 a bottle.

Fair Trade? It's Just the Start!

2009-02-23T04:27:00.000-08:00

We have a lively African Studies Centre, at Coventry University, bringing together students and teachers from across that great continent. Meeting them makes it harder to accept the terrible poverty many of them have left at home.

Africa never was a dark continent it is full of light and colour, rich in agricultural, human and mineral resources together with immense cultural riches in art, literature and today especially music.

Despite these riches the continent has been unable to escape the clutches of neo-colonialism, what Kwane Nkrumah called back in 1965, “the worst form of imperialism. For those who practice it, it means power without responsibility and for those who suffer from it, it means exploitation without redress.”

Escape from former colonial powers Britain and France, and newer ones like the United States or as is common today China is difficult. The rich countries argue that the solution to breaking the bonds of dependency is free trade.

Gordon Brown, even at this time of global economic crisis, has called for a revival of the Doha trade round. Rich governments make huge claims for trade reforms. Closer inspection invariably reveals the reason. They are the big gainers, whilst there is some trickle down to the poorer countries, the very poor get next to nothing.

How can trade liberalisation of itself help an isolated African village? For sustained economic growth yes poor counties need to increase their exports to the rich countries gaining foreign exchange so that they can invest in the capital goods needed to drive their development and trade barriers can hinder those exports.

But trade reform alone is not enough to lift the extreme poor out of poverty. Even if incomes get raised only a tiny proportion goes to the public investments needed to help them escape the poverty trap.

As global capitalism crumbles with many unsure of their jobs it may not be the best time to ask people to pay over the odds for their shopping. But that is just what many of us will be doing as fair-trade fortnight comes around again (23rd Feb-March 8th).

In a way it is a symbolic event highlighting the injustice of the current world trading system but for those involved its effects are real. FINE the international federation of fair-trade organisations defines it as, “a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, which seeks greater equity in international trade”.

The crucial thing is mutual respect between producers and consumers. For many years the UK retail co-operative retail sector stood alone in supporting fair trade. Despite its own economic weaknesses the concept so fitted with its values that it wholeheartedly supported fair trading initiatives. Even today when for some retailers fair-trade has become a way of increasing margins the Co-op has more fair-trade products in its stores than any other supermarket (and there is 20% off for fair-trade fortnight).

A good example is the conversion of its chocolate range to fair-trade. (Chocolate is a product I am unable to resist) When in the 1990’s thanks to structural adjustment programmes the cocoa market was liberalised Ghanaian farmers faced a grim future. To combat the threat in 1993, they formed a co-op - “Kuapa Kokoo" which in, Twi, means "Good Cocoa Farmers Company".

They sought to capture more of the value chain and having developed knowledge of the western chocolate market, decided to produce their own, branded chocolate bar. In October 1998 Twin Trading and Kuapa Kokoo came together, along with The Body Shop, supported by Christian Aid and Comic Relief, to found The Day Chocolate Company. That autumn, Divine, the first ever fair-trade chocolate bar aimed at the mass market was launched onto the UK confectionery market.

In 1993 it would have been extraordinary to imagine that in just fifteen years Kuapa Kokoo would have some 50,000 members in 1,200 villages, selling 40,000 tonnes of cocoa, turning over more than £20million representing 8% of Ghana’s output and nearly 1% of the world’s. Of course Ghana would have been far better off without structural adjustment programmes and we still need real trade justice but in the meantime Divine chocolate is just that. It can be found in Oxfam shops and as the source it means that the Co-op sells more fair-trade chocolate than all the other supermarkets put together.

More important however is the relationship that has been built between the producers and the consumers based on the principle that the producers should be paid what they need rather than the market rate.

This is just one small step but it is a beginning as Marx said in the Critique of the Gotha Programme “after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

'Times they are a Changin' at the Co-op

2009-02-04T03:07:00.000-08:00

As Bob Dylan is unveiled as the new weapon in the Co-ops campaign to show that ‘Times are a changing’ changes continue apace. In December, members of Lothian and the Borders Co-op voted to join the Co-op Group coming quickly after the takeover of Summerfield further enhancing the Groups UK food business.

Now the times are changing in financial services. With the dramatic collapse in confidence of the banks the Co-op and the mutuals have been seen as a safe haven. The proposed super-mutual with the merger of Co-operative Financial Services and the Britannia, the UK’s second biggest building society, creating a new £75 billion business signals the arrival of serious competition for the high street banks.

This merger is possible because of the new Butterfill Act, an act of parliament sponsored Sir John Butterfill MP allowing different types of mutual to merge. Financial mutuals have not been immune to the recession and the credit crunch but so far mergers have been amongst building societies. With some smaller societies coming unstuck in attempts to copy the aggressive business models of former societies like Northern Rock.

The Britannia is not in this category despite this credit rating agencies Moody’s and Fitch have downgraded the Co-op’s position to negative suggesting that the new group will be more exposed to wholesale funding markets. You may think that this is a bit rich coming from agencies that failed to warn of the credit crunch but this deal will weaken slightly the historically strong deposit to loan ratio of the Co-op and increase exposure to Britannia’s larger proportion of wholesale funding. There is little risk however for the 3 million Britannia members who will join the Co-op Group which pays out an annual dividend offsetting any risk to their annual loyalty bonus and it is these members who will be voting on the deal.

Both parties argue this is a merger from strength. Britannia has been a champion of mutuality offering better returns to its members. The new business has the potential to offer an even better service. For Co-operative Financial Services (CFS), formed from, the Co-op Bank, Smile the Internet Bank and Co-operative Insurance, this is good news. There has been some painful restructuring at CFS particularly in the insurance business (CIS) where big changes in adjusting to the world of online and telephone services and fewer home visits led to a number of job losses. Today’s CFS and Britannia make a good fit with remarkably little duplication in the two businesses offering huge potential for cross selling. They are committed to working with all recognised trade unions to effectively manage any changes but the £75 billion merger is projected to generate a modest £60million of cost savings good news for the workers in each organisation.

Britannia CEO Neville Richardson, and proposed CEO of the new Group says that, "This proposed merger offers a unique opportunity to create a new force in British financial services – strongly capitalised and with the scale to offer customers a full range of products and services that are ethical, mutual and co-operative”.

With over nine million customers and 350 branches this will lift the Co-op from a niche player to a high street fixture. Statistically you are more likely to get divorced than to change banks yet even before this merger 2008 saw a 65% increase in customers transferring their current accounts to the Co-op and a 40% growth in retail savings. With banking giants like HBOS and RBS shrinking before our eyes this is a golden opportunity for the Co-op to make a concerted pitch for their customers.

David Anderson Chief Executive of the CFS has described this merger as “transformational not just for the co-operative movement but for the UK Financial services sector as a whole.”

This is going to be a tough year for everyone in financial services but as Andrew Hill wrote in the Financial Times, “Britannia members should not hesitate to vote for the deal. They won’t get a windfall or an upfront payment those days are long gone. Membership of the Co-op offsets any small risk to their annual dividend posed by exposure to deadbeat buy-to-let landlords. Throw in the kudos of being joint pioneers of legislation aimed at bringing different mutuals together and the result is a rare warm glow at the heart of a very chilly financial services sector.”

"They Planted for us to eat: We will plant for them to eat"!

2009-01-22T03:35:00.000-08:00

That old Palestinian saying contains the philosophy of Al Zaytouna, the Palestinian Olive Tree Association, founded in 2004 a non-profit association working in all the Palestine agricultural areas that produce olives. The olive branch, used as a symbol of peace, is here a symbol of the Palestinians struggle for survival.

Palestine often said to be the home of the olive tree, has some of the oldest olive groves in the world, as much as 1500 to 2000 years old. With more than 12 million olive trees, covering nearly 200,000 acres they produce fruit that supports over half the population and dominate the agricultural landscape. But for Palestinian farmers the process of growing and selling their produce is an incredibly difficult challenge.

According to one of Zaytounas partners, War on Want, olive oil is the backbone of the Palestinian agricultural economy, providing employment for 65% of the population. But the last five years have decimated the industry with large swathes of olives groves being razed by Israeli bulldozers or burned to the ground by Israeli settlers. Large amounts of oil go to waste because it is too dangerous for farmers to harvest the crops or because of movement restrictions. Every year over half of the oil produced is literally poured down the drain due to their inability to access international markets and over the last four years the Israeli occupying forces have uprooted almost 400,000 olive trees with a value of over $60 million

This makes the hard lives of the Palestinians that much harder, but in response the Palestinian Farmers’ Union and a group of olive oil producers came together to form Al Zaytouna to find ways to protect their livelihoods and win new markets for their products. As an umbrella organization, Al Zaytouna, helps to organize farmers and focus their efforts in defense of their interests.

The Olive growers and olive pressers are organized into co-operatives with Al Zaytouna representing 14 cooperatives with a total of 1,700 olive oil producers. Six of the co-ops are organic although pretty much all Palestinian olive oil is organic because of the use of traditional farming methods and a key task is to help the co-ops obtain organic certification. Al Zaytouna is managed by an elected board of directors and run by a professional management team supported by specialized volunteer staff including several volunteers from overseas.

Just to show that the USA is not a monolithic bloc of evil doers another partner is ACDI/VOCA. The Washington based NGO dates back to the 1997 merger of Agricultural Cooperative Development International and Volunteers in Overseas Cooperative Assistance, two U.S. non-profit economic development organizations working largely in agriculture.

They have been remarkably successful under these astonishingly tough conditions. Al Zaytouna – supported cooperatives have eradicated the olive fly, a major threat to production, increased oil production some 40% between 2005 and 2008, created local committees that train farmers in harvest, storage and production techniques and provided improved storage equipment such as stainless steel tanks to maintain the oil's quality.

Even with improved products the growers need access to customers and this is where the UK end Zaytoun comes in. Zaytoun, a member of Co-operatives UK is a co-perative Community Interest Company. The Government developed the Community Interest Company (CIC) as a new type of company designed for social enterprises that wish to use their profits and assets for the benefit of the community. The first CICs were registered with Companies House in just 2005.

Since 2004 Zaytoun has imported more than 150 tons of olive oil (including now certified organic olive oil), as well as Nablusi olive oil soap, za’atar (thyme based herb mix), dates, couscous and almonds.

Heather Masoud of Zaytoun says that trade, while difficult in the current political climate, is the best way to make a difference: “The Palestinian people have long been associated with terrorism or victimhood in the popular media, and their rich culture and society has often been overshadowed by this emphasis on violence or extreme poverty. Aid donations, whilst necessary, rarely foster foundations for long-term prosperity and social revitalisation. Our trade with the Palestinian people has brought in excess of £1 million to their economy, and support for rural society.”

The current situation is indeed grave but as Heather says, “the current assault in Gaza largely does not affect Zaytoun’s supply chains. In the main the Palestinian producers we work with are in the West Bank”. However she adds, “The West Bank supply chain is also a vulnerable one; the Palestinian’s do not have any control of their sea or land borders or their air space. Relying on the Occupying force to ‘allow’ trade is a weak position and as we saw in Gaza the economy will be destroyed if Israel also decides to deny passage of goods there.”

In fact in Zaytoun did source couscous from a women’s co-op in Gaza but the business was no longer viable because Israel has not allowed any of their products to cross the border for the last 3 years.

We have all been shocked by recent events in Gaza but we can all support the Palestinians by buying Zaytoun Olive oil and their other products and it is time I think that we mounted a campaign to get their oil into our major supermarkets!

Interested in where you can obtain Zaytoun Palestinian Olive Oil?
Go to: www.zaytoun.org

Ish Ash Osh Happy New Year For The Woodcraft Folk

2009-01-09T06:54:00.000-08:00

New Year is a time for the young and this year could be a particularly good one for that most important of our youth organisations, the Woodcraft Folk. Founded back in the 1920’s as an alternative to the growing militarization of Scouting the aim was to develop a new social order to support world peace, partly by introducing poorer children from urban slums to the joys of exercise, fresh air and the countryside.

Writing as The Headman ("Little Otter") the Woodcraft Folk's founder, Leslie Paul, in the 1926 book Who's For the Folk, said:

'The Woodcraft Folk seek to establish a new social order. They believe that when the worker achieves freedom from wage slavery and the fruits of the soil are garnered by the toilers, then will a new stage of development open out to man. A new epoch, rich in promise of a finer social life and a greater awakening of intellect. We are rebels ... and to this decadent civilization, we bring a new fire and a new energy. We go out of the town and away to the hills and woods with our little light-weight tents packed in our rucksacks ... after the ugliness and monotony of the smoky city we find new life among the green growing things and new health from the sun and the four winds. And this health, together with our understanding, enables us to fight tenaciously for social betterment.''

Not exactly New Labour language.

Well that was the thought back in 2005 when Margaret Hodge, then children's minister told the Folk, that it would not get its annual grant of £52,000 putting the volunteer led organization under considerable strain. The Department of Education and Skills said their claim for funding lacked detail and did not have "sufficiently robust outcome indicators". Which they said meant it did not represent "good value for money''.

So freedom from wage slavery is not a “robust outcome indicator”.

Some Folk felt that the cut was more to do with their strong opposition to the Iraq War. Having always had strong peace movement links they had affiliated to the Stop the War Coalition. A newspaper advertisement calling its members to attend the great anti-war march led to a letter from the Charity Commission about overstepping the mark. Another suggestion for the failure of their application was that Woodcraft was too “middle class”. Something the Folk strenuously rejected.

The cut caused a huge outcry from its friends including a parliamentary revolt with 113 MPs signing a Commons motion deploring the move, tabled by Morning Star columnist and Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn. Nevertheless the cut lead to local Woodcraft Groups around the country having their annual grant suspended and the crisis was compounded when Woodcraft Folk General Secretary Andy Piercy was hospitalised after suffering a suspected stroke during the campaign.

Eventually after a meeting with an embattled Margaret Hodge she offered a member of her own staff to work for the Folk for 12 months on secondment to help support them to look for ways to diversify their funding.

In 2006 the Folk acquired the skills and energy of a new and at twenty seven, youthful, general secretary Kirsty Palmer. She set to work to put the Folk on a sound footing which resulted in a new constitution agreed at the 2007 annual conference. It began, “The Woodcraft Folk is an educational movement for children and young people, designed to develop self confidence and activity in society, with the aim of building a world based on equality, friendship, peace and co-operation.”

The search began too for alternative funding. Their first major success was persuading the government’s Climate Challenge Fund, to support – “C-Change” a project which engages young people who have some knowledge and concern about climate change to raise the awareness of their peers.

Then late last year the Folk hit the jackpot when they where awarded a five-year grant of £1.26 million from the Big Lottery Fund for the TREE (Training, Representation, Equality and Engagement) project. Developed by young Woodcraft Folk members and to be led by them, in partnership with the National Youth Agency, the Co-operative College and the National Deaf Children’s Society it will engage 10-18 year olds in decision-making and the development of services, policy and practice, giving them the skills to campaign and communicate.

Among the aims is welcome plan to increase the number of Woodcraft Folk groups. Debs McMahon, Woodcraft Folk’s Membership Development Manager said “It really is a fantastic opportunity to give young people new experiences and skills, whilst making a real difference to Woodcraft Folk groups and the wider community.”

This is a great boost for the Woodcraft Folk, let’s hope they build on this opportunity, and it brings forward the day the fruits of the soil are garnered by the toilers!

Interested in the Woodcraft Folk See: www.woodcraft.org.uk

Nick Solves your Christmas Shopping Dilemmas with Twelve(ish) Gifts for Christmas

2008-12-16T08:13:00.000-08:00

1. A tree. A real “guilt free” tree means the Woodland Trust. Dedicate a tree for just £15 in one of the Trusts woods around the country, nice for a Boxing Day visit. Or for the young how about membership of the Wildlife Detectives: go to: www.woodland-trust.org.uk

2. Christmas Fizz: Christmas means a bit of sparkling wine so how about the new Co-operative Fairtrade Cape Sparkling Brut at only £7.99, comes from the Du Toitskloof wine co-operative in South Africa’s Western Cape. Available from selected Co-op shops.

3. A Drop of the Hard Stuff: If you are a near a Waitrose or Sainsbury’s (I would not usually recommend it except) they are selling Havana Club Anejo Especial Rum 70cl at £13.99. Three pounds off the normal price and with the credit crunch we all need to save a few pennies.

4. Christmas Pudding: Fairtrade and Organic Christmas pudding produced by the village bakery are available from Oxfam shops or online at: www.oxfam.org.uk, where you can also get Fairtrade Luxury Chocolates - 225g Box the finest luxury Belgian chocolates in sixteen different flavours - in dark, milk and white chocolate.

5. Music: classical CD of the year has to be: FIESTA, featuring the stars of the Proms- the Simon Bolivar Youth Orchestra of Venezuela conducted by Gustavo Dudamel. A stunning recording on Deutsch Grammophon of a selection of the best in Latin American music live from Caracas! Or for folkies my favourite is Gaughan Live! At the Trades Club on Greentrax. Dick Gaughans plays that hot-bed of radicalism, the Hebden Bridge Trades and Labour Club at the end of his annual tour of England. Full of great songs my favourite is Tom Paine’s Bones. World music CD of the year has to be the release after a decade of the Buena Vista Social Club live at Carnegie Hall. This superb double album is available from: Cuba Solidarity. Order and enquiries hotline: 0208-800-0155.

6. Coffee Table Book: Peace: 50 years of protest 1958-2008 By Barry Miles. £25.00 The Story of the Nuclear Disarmament symbol, its origins and how it became a global symbol for peace in a large format book with over 150 pictures and illustrations. Available from CND online shop at www.cnd.org

7. Stocking Filler Book: a beautiful produced small book is, Crossing the River of Fire, the Socialism of William Morris, by Mahamdallie, Hassan. Published by Redwords at £7.99 available from Bookmarks see: www.bookmarksbookshop.co.uk

8. Some Poetry: for lifting the spirit how about Palestine by David & Helen Constantine. (Modern Poetry in Translation, Series 3 No.9, just £11) A collection of first-class poems – original and in translation, dealing with the idea, the myth and the reality of Palestine. Available from: www.mptmagazine.com/

9. For the Jazz Lover: How about, Forward Groove Jazz and the Real World from Louis Armstrong to Gilad Atzmon by Britain’s leading jazz critic Chris Searle. Available from Britain’s leading bookshop: www.foyles.co.uk/ and save £2.25 online from the list price of £14.99.

10. Fine Silver Jewelry: try some fairtade silver jewelry from Mexico and Peru, including moon & stars earrings and a Dragonfly brooch from my own favourite fairtade online shop run by Stella Emblis for Nicaragua Solidarity at: www.nicaraguasc.org.uk A site that also has a terrific DVD movie and music CD selection.

11. Next Years Diary has to be Housmans 2009 at £8.95 it includes the famous International Peace Directory, plus notable anniversaries and quotations. Celebrating 50 years of the establishment of London's Peace House, home to Peace News and Housman’s Bookshop - and the 75years of the Peace Pledge Union. See: www.housmans.com

12. And if you hurry there are a few exclusive Martin Rowson Morning Star Christmas cards left 5 cards for £8 or 10 cards for £15 (plus £1 p&p) Call: 0208-510-0815 (Mon-Fri 9-4pm).

BEHIND THE LABEL: THE ART AND CRAFT OF CO-OPERATIVE CULTURE

2008-11-28T04:44:00.000-08:00

A depressing part of modern life is the selling of culture at Christmas. Celebrity biographies, compilations of the years hits, all at a discount, with a few days shelf life, before they end up, at best, in Oxfam shops.

Chumbawumba’s latest CD cover has a cultural manifesto on it, part of it says, “The boy bands have won, and all the copyists and the tribute bands and the TV talent show producers have won, if we allow our culture to be shaped by mimicry, whether from lack of ideas or from exaggerated respect. You should never try to freeze culture.”

When working class culture has been reduced to voting for the underdog on X-Factor (or celebrity Come Dancing) here is a serious cultural discussion on a CD cover! How can they do this?

Thanks to the label! Every aspect of the music’s production, from the writing, the collaborators, the recording, the cover design, is under the control of the artist because one of the important things about this classic Sgt Peppers of an album is the record label itself. Boy Bands is NMCD 28 on the No Masters Co-operative Limited.

No Masters contradicts the idea that there is nothing more utopian than an artists co-operative. With a dozen members the co-op shows that artistic creation can be a genuinely collective effort.

In 1990 having written a batch of songs, Jim Boyes, showed them to John Tams. Tams says you should record them and I’ll produce the album. Getting a record deal for radical folk songs proved a non starter so they set about building their own label and with the help of the Sheffield Co-operative Development Agency the No Masters label and its publishing arm Voice publishing was born. Since then they have, “sought out writers, performers and musicians who were, in their various ways, seeking to celebrate and extend those bits of the people's tradition invariably described as 'radical' or 'political'.”

NMCD 1 was Out the Blue by Jim Boyes, he was soon joined in the Co-op by Mike Waterson, Jo Freya, Lester Simpson, Barry Coope, Fi Fraser and Ray Hearne.

Ray (NMCD17, Broad Street Ballads) has been chair of the Co-op from the beginning and has a new album out in the spring. Sadly Lal Waterson who was part of the co-op and one of England’s finest song writers died in 1998 but her talent is celebrated on Lal NMCD27, with Jo Freya utilising all the skills of co-op members.

Stalwarts have been Coope, Boyes and Simpson, probably our best vocal harmony group. Their work covers classic folk to original compositions with interesting explorations of the song of the First World War and of Christmas. Their original material is based on sharp social observation NMCD20, Twenty-Four Seven is a particular favourite of mine freshly pertinent in the present global financial meltdown.

They have explored traditional Christmas music as you will find on NMCD25 a selection of Midwinter Songs and Carols or earlier collections NMCD13 A Garland of Carols, and NMCD21, Fire and Sleet and Candlelight a delight. The trio are joined by Fi Fraser, Georgina Boyes and Jo Freya to sing songs that you will not hear in a shopping mall but that are in some parts an organic part of the Christmas season. The Christmas albums are something special - even well-intentioned people find them difficult to understand if they don't know about the tradition of working-class writers of Christmas hymns and carols and popular performance that continue into the present day in the North Midlands, Yorkshire and the South West of England. It's very much a working class tradition - with very local live performances (where else do you get four-part harmony roared out in pubs today?) The men and women who wrote these hymns cum carols were radicals in their own way too - this was and is a do-it-yourself culture in the way that the Punks did it for themselves - they said what they thought.

Today the songs of World War One are an integral part of our culture. NMCD14, Christmas Truce, Kerstbestand, a partnership with Belgian choir, Wak Maar Proper, is a collection of songs that mark the 1914 Christmas Truce another collaboration is on Private Peaceful NMCD24 with Michael Morpurgo. The inspiration is Morpurgo’s fictional anti-hero representing soldiers executed for desertion or cowardice. "Private Peaceful" was originally written and then recorded as part of the campaign to get pardons for FirstWar soldiers shot at dawn and several of the other recordings were commissioned by Peace Concerts Passendale.

Their work with Morpurgo continues with On Angel Wings NMCD30, a re-telling of the Christmas story through the eyes of a young shepherd. Indeed they complete their heavy late autumn touring schedule with a performance at St Pauls Cathedral, no less, on December 21st, with readings by Joanna Lumley and James Naughtie.
Co-op members since 2006, Chumbawumba’s, first offering was NMCD23 ‘A Singsong and a Scrap’ which co-operatively includes vocals by Coope, Boyes and Simpson. Some think it possible to separate song and politics but we know all culture is political. The Chumba’s make great pop songs like On eBay about the trashing of the Baghdad Museum found on NMCD26, Get on With It. They say,”Becoming part of the No Masters collective has been an entirely logical step for us in Britain. It suits what we want and what we think, both about the music industry and about the world. We feel like we're amongst like-minded people.”
No Masters has a stream of new material, Jo Freya who was a member of the Old Swan Band, Blowzabella and Token Women. With the freedom of the label has produced what she calls her first genuinely solo album NMCD29 Female Smuggler which explores her huge musical vocabulary.
No Masters is a real co-operative all major decisions are taken collectively and all profits are recycled back into the business to produce more music. The production and creation of all aspects of the music from engineering the sound to designing the CD sleeves is all done by sharing the skills of the co-op members. No crude division of labour here this is a true combination of art and craft.

So for some truly co-operative culture that will last beyond Boxing Day the NO Masters CD’s are a must you can find them at: http://www.nomasters.co.uk/ where it says, “No Masters celebrates song writing that addresses issues: that is rooted in its time and its communities: that is engaged with the struggles confronting and reshaping those communities: that pays homage to its traditions by reworking them; and that is unafraid to take sides whilst eschewing propaganda. It is a unique force in folk music.”

Just the antidote to Christmas with Ant and Dec.

We Need a Good Lefty President

2008-10-31T08:28:00.000-07:00

Like almost every civilised person on the planet I am quietly praying for an Obama victory in the US elections. I am so nervous about his chances that I have been unable to admit even to myself how much I want him to win. So imagine my disappointment when in Raleigh North Carolina he ridiculed McCain’s accusation that he was a socialist.

Partly I can understand him doing this when you consider what has happened to socialists in the United States. But part of me wanted him to say, “so what”?

I suppose my dream is for a Eugene Victor Debbs.

He was the Socialist Party of America candidate for the presidency between 1904 and 1920, the final time from prison. In a speech in Utah in 1910, he said,

“I am not a Labor Leader; I do not want you to follow me or anyone else; if you are looking for a Moses to lead you out of this capitalist wilderness, you will stay right where you are. I would not lead you into the promised land if I could, because if I led you in, some one else would lead you out. You must use your heads as well as your hands, and get yourself out of your present condition.”

In the 1912 election he received almost a million votes, and in 1920 from prison over 400,000. Debs was arrested for violating the Espionage Act 1917 which led to socialists being arrested for sedition for opposing the First World War. Deb's speeches against Woodrow Wilson’s administration and the war really got under Wilson’s skin and Wilson lead a vendetta against him.

Debs was convicted and sentenced to serve ten years in prison. He was also disenfranchised for life. (Something that cripples the black vote in America to this day).

From the dock he made his most famous speech which contained the following:

“Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free”.

Now that is the sound of a socialist and roll on the day when someone saying that can get elected not just in America but everywhere.

p.s. We had a sparklers and parkin party on Sunday sort of bonfire nite lite. Anyway that was my excuse to mark the fact that Debbs was born on November 5th 1855!

The Centenary of the Worlds Wisest and Wittiest Economist

2008-10-28T03:37:00.000-07:00

“The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable,” one of the many wise and witty sayings of John Kenneth Galbraith whose centenary we celebrate this month. I still have my dog eared penguins of his classic texts - for the first time I had found a readable economist! When probably the greatest Canadian died in April 2006 the Chancellor of the Exchequer was quick to pay tribute, he "was a brilliant economist and writer and a great friend of the United Kingdom, and his books will be widely read in generations to come."

Gordon Brown is now discovering as Galbraith put it that, “politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable”. In retrospect it’s a pity Brown did not read Galbraith’s work more assiduously. At least it would have enriched his economic vocabulary with phrases like "the conventional wisdom", “countervailing power”, the "technostructure" and the "affluent society" instead of just stating it’s the right thing to do he would have been able to explain why.

He was born on October 15th 1908 on the north shore of Lake Erie, in Iona Station, Ontario, the only place where to be a ‘scotch’ is not to be a drink. His 1964 book, the Scotch, explains that the southern Ontario farmland was occupied by Scots driven from the Highlands by the clearances and therefore sworn enemies of the Tories. A trait he carried throughout his life as he said, “the modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness”.

Galbraith is remarkably ‘quotable’ when asked if Galbraith’s work would last. Amartya Sen, economist and Nobel laureate, said read The Affluent Society it showed a “great insight,” which “has become so much a part of our understanding of contemporary capitalism that we forget where it began. It’s like reading Hamlet and deciding it’s full of quotations. You realize where they came from”.

As he wrote in the Affluent Society, "People are the common denominator of progress. So... no improvement is possible with unimproved people, and advance is certain when people are liberated and educated. It would be wrong to dismiss the importance of roads, railroads, power plants, mills, and the other familiar furniture of economic development.... But we are coming to realize... that there is a certain sterility in economic monuments that stand alone in a sea of illiteracy. Conquest of illiteracy comes first".

Of course “conventional wisdom” has kept him out of fashion for twenty years but now as he said “the enemy of the conventional wisdom is not ideas but the march of events” and his book the Great Crash 1929 is a best seller again. It is not too late for us to learn from him, “the salary of the chief executive of a large corporation is not a market award for achievement. It is frequently in the nature of a warm personal gesture by the individual to himself” or “the process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled”.

His great works like American Capitalism, the Affluent Society and the New Industrial State; show a far from dismal science. He criticised economic theory for ignoring and obscuring the economic power of large corporations. He criticised politicians who aligned themselves with the objectives of the large corporation instead of acting in the public interest. He also censured his fellow economists as ‘idiot savants’ who perform sophisticated mathematical analysis but make no attempt to understand the real world.

"The emancipation of belief," he wrote, "is the most formidable of the tasks of reform, the one on which all else depends." His weapons in leading that struggle did not always please his fellow economists; they included irony, satire, and laughter as he said “the conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking”.

Galbraith stood out from his profession like much of academic thinking economics has spent decades insulating itself behind impenetrable language, building abstraction upon abstraction using equations and models to build worlds of perfect competition and rational actors.

“It is my guiding confession that I believe the greatest error in economics is in seeing the economy as a stable, immutable structure”, he said and “it is a far, far better thing to have a firm anchor in nonsense than to put out on the troubled sea of thought.”

Galbraith made it his life long quest to expose business's capacity for self-deception; “When you see reference to a new paradigm you should always, under all circumstances, take cover. Because ever since the great tulipmania in 1637, speculation has always been covered by a new paradigm. There was never a paradigm so new and so wonderful as the one that covered John Law and the South Sea Bubble — until the day of disaster”. As he said, “faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof”.

When interviewed about his last short monograph, the Economics of Innocent Fraud (1999) he said, “It deals with all of the things we do, in an innocent way, to cover up the truth. I begin with the renaming of the system. It used to be capitalism. But that evokes Marx and Rockefeller. So now we speak of the market system. That is a nice bland expression, which forgets those off-color references. Then I write about work. We talk of the enormous virtues of work, but it turns out that that is mostly for the poor. If you're rich enough or if you're a college professor, the virtue lies in leisure and the use you make of your leisure time. Next, I go on to the stock market, where I show, I think without a doubt, that what is called "financial genius" is merely a rising market. That whole effort has given me a good deal of pleasure”.

The vindication of the final uncovering of that fraud would undoubtedly bring Galbraith pleasure just as surely as it brings misery to millions. Although I still remember how he bought me pleasure when he was cavorting with Bette Midler on the Michael Parkinson show.

As he pointed out, "In all life one should comfort the afflicted, but verily, also, one should afflict the comfortable, and especially when they are comfortably, contentedly, even happily wrong".

Our Mutual Friends in the North

2008-10-24T06:51:00.000-07:00

Events have turned the world upside down in the provision of financial services. It is crystal clear that the demutualisation, the conversion of Building Societies into banks has been a total disaster. Building Societies have not been immune to the global banking crisis but their record compared to those that took the route of transition into banks is stark. There are the high profile collapses like Northern Rock, HBOS and Bradford and Bingley. But not one of the converted building societies has survived as a viable independent business.

Many of us argued this was a mistake from the start. Some time ago the All Party Parliamentary Group for Building Societies and Financial Mutual’s under took an enquiry into the true costs of demutualisation. In evidence the Building Societies Association said it would not be surprised if the full costs of all the demutualisation’s amounted to well over £1billion. Well we now know that was just the first billion!

That cost did not include the loss of over a quarter of their branch networks. There are technical arguments about the merits or demerits of mutuals over plcs but current events have more than demonstrated the merits of mutuality.

Greed and privatisation did not just take out those ex-building societies we also lost the Trustee Savings Bank and The National Giro Bank. Almost every City had a Trustee Savings bank; my own personal favourite was the Birmingham Municipal Bank which at its peak had three quarters of a million account holders. Following amalgamation in the 1970’s to form the national TSB it in turn disappeared into the private sector when it merged with Lloyds in 1995. The National Giro bank started out in 1968 as the “people’s bank” an innovative post office bank that was the first to pay interest on current accounts. It too succumbed to privatisation being swallowed by the Alliance and Leicester now part of Spanish banking giant Santander.

Now we have the chance to turn the tide against privatisation. The demand was made loud and clear at the Co-op Party conference that we must start a massive campaign for the remutualisation of Northern Rock.

Northern Rock will be slimmed down in public ownership but will still have all the flaws of a mortgage bank and will be no more sustainable in the private sector than it was before the government bail out. The Government will then look to sell the remnants off to a major bank and it will disappear as an independent institution.

When “greed was good” demutualisation was relatively simple – first bribe the management and then the members and get them to vote for a flotation. Remutualisation is more complex but not impossible.

Last year Britannia Building Society successfully remutualised 850,000 customers of the old Bristol and West Building Society which had been taken over by the Bank of Ireland. In buying the 65 strong Bristol & West branch network and £4.5bn savings book from the Bank of Ireland for £150m the customers became members once again.

Interestingly the Britannia is now in talks with Co-op Financial Services which includes The Co-op Bank, Smile and CIS about a possible merger. The Co-op Bank owned by the Co-op Group is not in itself a Co-op itself and this potential merger depends on changes to the Building Societies (Funding) & Mutual Societies (Transfers) Act, which is currently at the House of Commons committee stage. Legislation is expected to be in place by the end of the year.
So it will be possible for mutual’s to take on and remutualise failed mortgage banks - we have to begin to make this the preferred option for the Government. We have to turn the tide in favour of social ownership.

“Now is the time, in the wake of the collapse of Northern Rock and the wider economic downturn to reinvigorate the debate about social ownership in the 21st century”, says John McDonnell in the new Left Economics Advisory Panel pamphlet, Building the New Common Sense, Social Ownership for the 21st Century. He adds, “We need to be creative, imaginative and bold in our demands and our actions – and that means tackling the fundamental question of ownership.” I could not agree more and let us start by giving Northern Rock back to the people of the North East!

Good as Gould

2008-10-17T03:36:00.000-07:00

It was good to hear from Bryan Gould in the Guardian recently. He began his excellent book, ‘A Future for Socialism’, back in 1989 with, “The Thatcherite experiment is now approaching its end”.

Sadly it has taken almost a further twenty years for that statement to be confirmed. And what a tragedy that now millions of people will lose their jobs and thousands more will lose homes, savings and pensions to show Gould’s analysis and prescription to be spot on.

The economic crisis has lead some to look back to see where it all went wrong. Gordon Browns bank nationalisation has reminded people of the 2003 Manifesto. On rereading it is far less suicidal than Peter Mandelson’s 1998 proclamation that new Labour was ‘intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich’.

It is worth remembering that Michael Foot lost that election not on economic policy but because of the Falklands War. Many will be surprised to hear that his successor Neil Kinnock wrote quite a good book on economics. ‘Making Our Way’ was published in 1986 and it’s not bad. He wrote, “The Labour Party’s economic priority is to expand investment – in industry, in ideas and in people – and to form a partnership for production between, government managers and workers committed to the modernisation of economy and society”.

It was Gould however, the face of the 1987 election, who was the most articulate in presenting the case for modern socialism. He argued in ‘A Future for Socialism’ that;

“The concession that full employment could no longer be the central objective of economic policy was of profound significance. It fundamentally undermined the post- war accommodation of capital and labour. Labour – even- organised labour – was dealt at severe blow. The balance of advantage in the labour market swung decisively to the employer.
The implications are wider still. If the government was now powerless to intervene in the workings of the labour market, and if economic policy as a whole was now to be defined in terms of what is acceptable to the money markets – if in other words markets alone were to determine outcome in these central parts of the economy – why should not markets not also prevail in other spheres of policy? If markets were to be trusted to produce the right results in economic policy, why not in education, or housing, or health care? So it was the Left sold the pass and lost the argument”.

How right he was he was also dead right that Britain had fallen in to habit of, “giving absolute priority to those who held assets and dealt in money, as opposed to those who made and provided goods and services and tried to sell them in international markets”.

Unfortunately when he ran for Labour leader there where few Gouldites and his anti-EU stance was against the grain of the time. So instead of following his prescription we followed a different one from the Cannon and Ball of contemporary economic thinking,

“For a time, it appeared as though Thatcherism’s harsh medicine and ‘enterprise culture’ had produced the great economic leap forward that Britain needed. In the 1990’s Britain can boast of some notable economic strengths – for example the resilience and internationalisation of our top companies; our strong industries like pharmaceuticals, aerospace, retailing and media; the pre-eminence of the City of London”.

Yes that’s Mandelson and Liddel, in ‘The Blair Revolution’, in 1996. Of course we may have had more such companies if we had not had Thatcher’s ‘enterprise culture’!
As recently as 1995 in the introduction to ‘The City in Europe and the World’ he argued that the City was the ‘economic powerhouse of Europe’ and urged Germany to become more like Britain. God forbid. Mandelson once gave the Churchill lecture in Berlin he could have done with Churchill’s comment, “I would rather see finance less proud and industry more content”.

Now the crisis is turning conventional wisdom on its head its time to state some facts firstly a deregulated city has had a license to print money yet now we need it can’t be found, secondly a healthy retail sector is a result of wealth not is cause, and a house is a place to live not a cash point.

Now the money lenders are being thrown out of the temple its time to look again at Gould’s ideas. This crisis is a turning point. The country is crying out for change lets not repeat our mistakes lets follow Gould’s advice;

“A Labour Government that wished to meet the twin objectives of managing the economy efficiently and putting socialist principles into practice would have to be clear that this bias in favour of financial orthodoxy must be reversed. Giving priority to the wealth creators is not in itself socialism, and it would require a radical departure from past practice and attitudes. It would take a Labour chancellor to be clear that it was the real economy, rather than the money economy that mattered, and it was our task to serve the interests of those who created real wealth”.

Once, Twice, Three Times a Mandy

2008-10-07T04:16:00.000-07:00

Dear Editor, Oh despair! Is Gordon Brown mad? Peter Mandelson represents all that is wrong with the Labour Party and as a consequence the British economy today. He is the architect of the hubris that lead Labour to swallow the Thatcherite mantra of deregulation and liberalisation regardless of its consequences. Slavish support for the so called "wealth creators" who have turned out to be no more that spivs and hucksters. We are not choosing to shut down financial globalisation as he puts it (Guardian 3/10/08). It is closing down because it was built on sand. When I worked to bring business and Labour together for a better understanding of one another before the 1997 election I said that Labour had gone from being anti-business to pro-business without an intervening period of understanding. How true that has turned out to be. Now Brown is creating new mega banks from the collapse of the unregulated secondary banking system. We are moving from a
position in which we had Banks that we could not afford to let fail to Banks we will not be able to afford to save. This crisis has only just begun and the last thing we need are new Labour cliches about globalisation is good for you when all that has happened is that with the conivance of governments like the one here in Britain international businesses have been allowed to escape any effective regulation.

Letter to the Guardian Published October 4th 2008

Co-operators go back to School

2008-10-07T04:14:00.000-07:00

A big issue at the Co-op Party conference was the role the movement should play in education. Co-operators have always had a commitment to education, an original Rochdale principle, was to the education of “their members, officers and employees and of the general public in the principles and techniques of Co-operation, both economic and democratic.”

In April the first co-operative trust school, Reddish Vale Technology College in Stockport, opened, and the second Andrew Marvel College in Hull is set to open soon. Schools Minister, Ed Balls, speaking at Co-op conference said the Government will make £500,000 available to pilot up to a 100 Trusts with the co-operative governance model.

One of the architects of the model, Mervyn Wilson, Co-op College CEO, hopes for a national chain of co-op trust schools and believes that “using co-operative values to raise achievement”, will help meet the governments’ aim of increasing diversity in the education system. Co-op Group CEO, Peter Marks, is also enthusiastic about the potential for co-op structures to allow stakeholders greater participation in school management “and a sense of ownership and engagement”.

In the August issue of the Journal of Co-op studies Professor Johston Birchall makes an important contribution to the debate about mutuality in the public services. He argues that ideas about a ‘new mutualism’ in the public services have three potential weaknesses, firstly that genuine mutuality, which implies solidarity and collective provision, is in competition with ideas favouring a more individualistic approach – like the personalisation of services, secondly that it is seen as an attempt to restore some of the benefits of mutual forms of welfare lost when the welfare state was founded without explaining what those benefits are - after all the performance of the old friendly societies was patchy to say the least and thirdly the reforms to public services hailed as mutual are not really all that mutual.

If we define mutuals as membership based organisations then in the public services who are the members and how much power do they have? Foundation hospitals, for example, have three categories of member each with their own representatives, patients, the public and the employees and their control over the nature and provision of services is strictly limited. These are substantial criticisms that require serious answers if mutual solutions are to play any part in the public services.

There was considerable disquiet at Co-op Party conference about aspects of the governments’ education policies including faith schools and the drive for trust schools and academies. Indeed Co-op MP Ken Purchase has tabled a Commons motion attacking the expansion of city academies, expressing disappointment that "Ed Balls should have been taken in by this nonsense spouted about the improvements in academies when there is no real evidence to show they can do anything at all, unless they have huge tranches of money that should be available in the education system generally".

Co-operators will come together to discus and learn more about what the co-op role in education should be at a day conference hosted by the Midlands Co-op Society at the Birmingham and Midland Institute on November 8th.

Personally working in a University before we try to mutualise the state sector there is plenty of work to be done. There is little teaching of the values and operation of non-plc structures in our business schools with widespread ignorance of co-ops and mutuals, and also of trusts and partnerships. This is a gap that the movement needs to fill if mutual business solutions are to become more widespread.

Meanwhile this years Co-op Party conference was a great success, don’t take my word for it, that was the view of Socialist Campaign Group News, its worth quoting ‘Tel’s Tale’ in full.

“The recent Co-op Party annual conference was a refreshing change from the mind-numbing world of new Labour. Delegates debated a wide range of resolutions, adopted a swath of progressive policies, including withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, no war against Iran, an early solution to the illegal armed Israeli occupation of Palestine. UK Co-ops were encouraged to build links with Co-ops in Palestine. Conference called for the strengthening of the UN and advocated that Britain starts a drive for global nuclear disarmament under its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, together with withdrawal from NATO. Delegates agreed that the Co-op Party should celebrate the 50th anniversary and achievements of the Cuban revolution, and intensify the campaign against the US blockade. Local Party councils were encouraged to affiliate to the Cuba Solidarity Campaign. The conference called on the party’s parliamentary group to oppose the building of any more nuclear power stations.
Among other good policies, delegates supported Northern Rock being turned into a mutual, instructed the party’s NEC to conduct an enquiry into NHS foundation trusts, to see whether they are sufficiently democratic and cooperative, and calls for the phasing out of faith schools. The coop party has getting on for 10,000 members, and every SCGN reader should join up.”

Sound advice!

Energy and the Question of Ownership

2008-09-25T07:31:00.000-07:00

In just one day - the most right wing US administration in living memory calls on Congress for billions of dollars to bail out the US financial system, the Portuguese launch the world’s first wave power plant and British Energy becomes French.

So we no longer have any ownership of our energy infrastructure. There are a lot of clichés we hear everyday from politicians these days. Three of my favourites are, “we will learn the lessons”, “the family have been informed” and “ownership does not matter”.

The last one we is a catchphrase of Business Secretary John Hutton. We never heard it when they were talking about housing of course. Forcing people to buy houses they could not afford is the main source of the current mess.

Mind it’s not a phrase you hear from people who actually own things like Warren Buffet or Lakshi Mittel or from the French for that matter. They will now have a constant stream of profits from their UK energy business. Every time we turn on the lights cash will stream across the channel.

The business secretary says this is good for Britain. I suppose from where we are it is. He has persuaded a foreign firm with some intellectual property to take over and run yet another dead British industry. So now we will get four new French nuclear power stations.

Today the UK economy is a bit like Wimbledon. We never win, but we put on a good show. All the prize money goes overseas but if we are lucky we get to stand on the hill watching it go on the big screen.

In this Alice in Wonderland world we are the winners. The stupid French have cheaper energy than us because they foolishly failed to embrace the market and invested in their energy industry for the long term. Now they have a product they can export across the world and reap the reward. Just how silly is that!

Meanwhile the global energy giants we have put our faith in are refusing to invest in UK renewables because as private firms they see more lucrative investments in existing energy sources elsewhere. To most observers the UK is facing a looming energy gap. But because of our obsession with not bucking the market we stand a good chance of being bucked by it.

Portugal has no indigenous carbon energy sources and yet has managed to obtain over half its energy from renewables. Locked into free-market dogma progress in the UK has been pitiful. We can begin to turn this around in October when the Energy Bill comes back to the commons. MP’s can give renewables the support they need with some preferential feed in tariffs to give them the certainty they need to invest.

But we need to go much further. The current global crisis in the banking sector shows the limits of regulation. When oil was discovered in the North Sea, we soon realised that it was going to be a long term and risky business bringing it to shore, we established a public sector business to undertake this challenge -The British National Oil Corporation. If we are to take on the challenge of developing a serious renewables industry particularly in the capital intensive wave and tide power arena we will need a similar public sector champion.

We need a British National Renewables Corporation.

Unlike the wind you can set your watch by the tides around Britain’s coast and if the Portuguese can harness wave power so can we. With a global shortage of credit we cannot wait for the private sector to come to the rescue.

The banks are being saved by ‘nationalisation’ in the USA and now our nuclear industry is being ‘nationalised’ by the French. If we want a significant renewables sector its early stage of development will require a large scale public sector solution believe me it will be a better long term investment than Northern Rock.

And this time we will have to do it ourselves.

Cuba, Co-op's and Hurricanes

2008-09-17T08:22:00.000-07:00

Each day I enjoy a co-operative and fair-trade breakfast of coffee, muesli and banana and raise a glass to Cuba. Not because new Labour has driven me to drink - my toast is not with rum but with Cuban orange juice.

In the 1980’s Cuba was the world’s largest citrus fruit exporter. The end of the USSR took away their main market and put them in direct competition with two of the big citrus fruit exporters the USA and Israel.

Today Cuba is the world’s laboratory for sustainable farming and food sovereignty – the World Bank has described it as “almost the anti-model”- pursuing an approach that links ecology with the decentralisation of the control of farms. Co-operatives are playing a key part in these developments.

The US blockade makes market access crucial. In 2000, Traidcraft, the Christian based fair trade organisation stepped in to help seven co-operatives in and around Ciego de Avila find new markets and help them to win Fair-trade status. Working alongside Gerber foods they are bringing first class Cuban fruit juices to European consumers and in developing the Fruit Passion brand aim to do for fruit juice what Café Direct has done for fair-trade coffee.

Modern consumers are increasingly concerned about the provenance of what they buy from the developing world and thanks to the Fairtrade Foundation there has been a huge increase in quality making the fair trade an easier choice to make. Fair-trade is not socialism but the Fair-trade mark does guarantee farmers a minimum price and an additional 'premium' payment. In Cuba the premium is used for projects that benefit the co-operatives - better machinery, vehicles, irrigation systems etc. or to finance other activities including cultural and recreational facilities.
The Association of Small Farmers (ANAP) representing the interests of co-operatives and individual farmers are also working to increase the involvement of women in the farms and their decision making processes.

Last year I visited the region of Cuba where these co-ops are based and the extra income fair trade brings can make a real difference. One of the dreadful things about capitalism is the way the abstraction of the market separates consumers from producers.

Now Traidcraft are running meet the people tours to Cuba in November, February or March visiting the CPA and CCS Jose Marti Co-operatives in Ciego de Avila that produce the juice that is so welcome on our breakfast tables.

Writing in Granma, Fidel Castro, points out that the recent hurricanes have done between $3 and $4 billion dollars worth of damage to Cuba. Farmers have not escaped unscathed and to help their recovery the least we can do is buy some of their output. So why wait? You can find Fruit Passion in Co-op shops as well as in Sainsbury’s and Waitrose, also the Co-op’s own brand fair-trade orange juice includes Cuban product in the blend.

Of course the concept of fair trade is not new. Back in 1906 the first Labour MP’s cited John Ruskin as the author who had most shaped their thinking. Ruskin makes a plea for fair trade in ‘Unto This Last’ published in 1862.

“In all buying, consider first, what condition of existence you cause in the production of what you buy; secondly whether the sum you have paid is just to the producer and in due proportion, lodged in his hands.”

Given the present shenanigans in the PLP it would seem that today the minds of some Labour MP’s seem to be shaped by an older writer than Ruskin – evidenced from their detachment of political expediency from morality – one Niccoli Machiavelli.

For details of Traidcraft trips to Cuba see: Meet the People Tours at www.Traidcraft.co.uk

The Search For Utopia - 150 Years of Robert Owen

2008-09-02T05:55:00.000-07:00

This year marks a century and half since the death of Robert Owen in 1858. The 2008 Society for Co-op Studies Conference is to be held appropriately at the New Lanark Mill Hotel, part of the New Lanark World Heritage Site, from 11-14th September and is titled, New Views of Society: Robert Owen for the 21st Century.

It is hard to do justice to Owen, in 1880 Frederick Engels wrote in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, “Every social movement, every real advance in England on behalf of the workers links itself on to the name of Robert Owen. He forced through in 1819, after five years’ fighting, the first law limiting the hours of labour of women and children in factories. He was president of the first Congress at which all the Trade Unions of England united in a single great trade association. He introduced as transition measures to the complete communistic organisation of society on the one hand, co-operative societies for retail trade and production.”

Owens ideas took a radical turn from his experience of managing what was the largest cotton spinning factory in Europe. New Lanark is a world of its own, set deep in the spectacular Clyde valley, almost cut off from the outside world, the Clyde falls providing the power to drive the mills. A lack of enthusiasm for his ideas amongst his business partners was resolved when he formed a partnership with a group of mainly Quaker backers to buy the New Lanark Mills giving him a free hand.

He set about improving the factory workers lives with better housing, healthy food, education and better working conditions. He formed a sick fund and a savings bank as well as a company store that ploughed its profits back into the community. His rigid monitoring and control of the workforce together with the application of new technologies paid off with a substantial increase in productivity and profitability.

His big idea was that a person’s environment had an impact on the formation of their character. Education was the core of Owenite philosophy – the idea that through the education of future generations a better world could be created is essentially the underpinning idea of all modern education. The turning point in Owens thinking seems to have stemmed from his meeting anarchist political philosopher William Godwin. His thinking about how to apply the lessons from New Lanark to wider society developed with meetings with Godwin and radical Francis Place and political economist James Mill. It was Pace and Mill who edited his essay “A New View of Society” giving it a depth and clarity that is absent from his later writings.

To celebrate Owen’s 80th birthday in 1851, a public meeting was held in London. Owen urged his audience to continue their efforts to “well educate, well employ, well place and cordially unite the human race.” The thousand strong crowd included Karl Marx who wrote to Engels that, “in spite of fixed ideas the old man was loveable and ironical.”

Today whilst New Lanark Mill Hotel, in a converted mill, is one of the great places to stay, Owens combination of social control and paternalism seems rather autocratic. He was from a different time - a reformer but no democrat. Many of his ideas however, like labour exchanges, gave us a vision of a possible alternative future. Engels said he gave us the, “practical proof that the merchant and the manufacturer are socially quite unnecessary.”

Owen was a utopian thinker there are many flaws in his “new view of society” but we will always need those who have the vision to see that another world is possible. Unless we can imagine a different future we can not even begin to make it happen.

As Oscar Wilde pointed out, “A map of the world that does not include utopia is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. And when it lands there, it looks out and seeing a better country, sets sail, Progress is the realization of Utopias.”

The Society for Co-operative Studies can be found at: www.co-opstudies.org

The End of Neo-Liberalism

2008-08-27T05:31:00.000-07:00

How quickly the TUC and party conference season comes around. This year rather than a knee jerk response to the threat of recession we need some deep reflection on economic policy. Be in no doubt the world has changed the neo-liberal boom is over.

Our Olympic performance shows that talent is essential for success but only long term investment can guarantee it. Economically we can only sustain our standard of living with high levels of investment. Now made difficult by the credit crunch and how we used that wave of cheap investment.

Recent economic prosperity was underpinned by historically low global prices for the key economic inputs of capital, energy and labour and deregulation and liberalisation enabled us to easily import them.

Western banks recycled surpluses generated from East Asia’s export of manufactures and from the oil and gas exporting countries. For a while they had more capital than they knew what to do with. The Bank of England reports, mangers invested in such complex financial instruments they still do not know what they have done with it! Sadly here this inflow of cheap capital was not invested in crucial infrastructure and productive capacity but was squandered on private equity and PFI schemes that added little to our capital stock or was used to subsidise current consumption.

UK fiscal policy drove a large proportion of this capital into new retail capacity to take advantage of cheap imports and into housing. Not to produce more houses, despite record prices we have had record low levels of construction, but driving house price inflation. Despite conventional wisdom high house prices do not equal wealth. Houses are not businesses, they do not innovate, generate new products, undertake R&D or train people, whilst they may once have been a store of value they do not create it.

This capital was cheap but not free - now it is payback time - the price is record trade deficits, massive public and private debt levels and a weakening pound. Now we need to generate domestic capital a tough task from a generation with no savings culture.

The energy story is a similar. When it was cheap we privatised our energy infrastructure, now it is more expensive we seem surprised that private firms pursue profits rather than the national interest. Our laiseez faire energy policy puts us at the mercy of global energy markets.

We must increase the output of domestic energy requiring capital but global firms take a global view why should they invest when they are making plenty selling us the imported stuff? We now have an underdeveloped energy infrastructure which needs investment across the piece, from renewables, new nuclear stations, new gas storage systems and replacement generating capacity.

Government intervention is vital, but a one off windfall tax is not enough, given the current structure of the industry it will only be paid by yet lower investment. Now sustained investment can only come from the public sector.

The third factor has been our inability to increase the productivity of the UK workforce. Our GDP has grown not by increasing the output per person, requiring higher investment in technology and skills; but by getting a higher proportion of people into work and by getting them to work longer.

This has been further sustained by the flow of low cost, highly motivated and well educated labour from Eastern Europe and from more women working. Now the pressure for higher labour market participation rates is looking desperate with attacks on lone parents and those on disability benefits.

With recession looming, the Poles are going home and the ones that stay are demanding decent pay and conditions. We will have to re-examine our education and training systems as we are forced to depend on home grown skilled Labour - meaning an end to long hours without training or companies having a free ride on skills.

It must be clear now that we can no longer postpone the development of a high investment, high technology, high skills economy. Currently we are not productive enough to import all our inputs. Now our financial services sector has shown the world that it is no better managed than our domestic car industry was.

The NICE decade is over we need the policies to get us saving, to get us developing our own energy supplies, and for us to have a high skills, high productivity economy.

That is the program we need to hear this conference season otherwise the sacrifices currently being made in living standards by Britain’s, workers will be for nothing. We will be letting David Cameron’s Tories off the hook we know they do not have the answers to these problems but does Labour?

Can David Milliband Save the Labour Party ?

2008-08-22T05:54:00.000-07:00

I cannot help but feel that the metropolitan commentariat do not understand how bad it has become for Labour out here in the country. The reason we need a new leader quickly is not so that we can stave off defeat in general election. Labour is in free fall. The Crewe by-election and the local and London result are not just a sign of a resurgent Conservative Party but that we are faced with the terrible fact that the electorate will vote in each place for whoever they think will beat Labour. They do not care what the policies of the Tories or Liberals are but will now vote for anyone but Labour.

This is simply not enough time to turn things around before a general election but the coming defeat can be mitigated by a swift change in leadership. The current leadership is not only politically bankrupt, can anyone remember any of the 18 Bills in the draft Queens speech, the Party as Tribune has consistently reported is also financially bankrupt.

Changing the leader won’t make things miraculously better but it will stop things getting worse. The test for a new leader is not is he or she Prime Ministerial but can they lead the Labour party in Opposition. Can they harry the Tories and set the agenda without the civil service behind them and with a rather small band of brothers.

I understand that David Milliband is the coming man, remember this is not about winning a general election frankly that is beyond any mortal at this stage, it is about rebuilding the Labour Party and stopping its destruction as any kind of force in British politics.

With this in mind I have some speech notes for David as he triggers the leadership campaign.

1) I have decided to stand for the leadership of the Labour Party. There can be no greater honour for me than to lead the Labour Party (note not New Labour). The Party has been my home and my family for all of my adult life, a family that includes, the trades unions and the co-operative movement (note to self they are saving us from bankruptcy) and it would be true to say that like all families we have had our differences some of them profound but I have never wanted to be in any other.
2) We are not conservatives, neo-conservatives or liberals we are democratic socialists and we must never forget it. I have the honour of representing a working class constituency and we have to ensure that we build outwards from the base. (Must stop the rot with working class voters)
3) Many of you will now that I had severe doubts about the war in Iraq . My loyalty to the party and its leader meant that I kept my council at that time. Today I cannot stand by when it is clear we need a fresh start to win back the trust of the people. (Message:Ant-war but loyal).
4) I have youth and experience. I understand how events in far away places can impact on life here in Britain and how we have to be internationalist in our outlook. (Cameron just has youth)
5) The greatest threat we face today is not Islamic terrorism but climate change. We have to have a major push for renewable energy we are not as a nation short of wind or waves, not only saving the planet but also saving imports of oil and gas. (I have a track record on this)
6) Britain can look forward to a bright future but we have to rectify some of the over zealous elements of the market that have damaged our country, like the housing bubble, it will take some time but we can do it. (Subtext: I will regulate where Gordon failed to tread).

How will he see the last two Labour leaders?
On Gordon Brown, he has been a great servant of the party and the country but new times and new challenges need new ideas and new remedies and that is what I can offer.

On Tony Blair, being close to the leadership I can see how it is possible just because of sheer pressure on time to get isolated from the everyday concerns of people when one is deeply involved in global politics and that is what we have to guard against.

And how can he take on the Tories:
On David Cameron, I like him, he has done a good job in reshaping the Conservative party, he accuses us of stealing his clothes but I think he has stolen ours and they look a little too big for him.

A change of leader now will not stave off defeat but it will breathe new life into the Party and give us a base to build from. There is no point waiting, that base will only get smaller, we have already lost half our members and half of our councillors all that delay can do is delay the process of renewal and rebuilding. This is the test of the new generation have they like those in Gordon Browns book the courage to make the change.

Is the Co-op Commonwealth Still Alive?

2008-08-22T05:47:00.000-07:00

Is the dream of the Co-operative Commonwealth still alive?

Joining the Co-op Party I had to “assert my belief in the co-operative commonwealth”. I never had a problem with this. In my sitting room there is a framed Walter Crane print of ‘liberty’ one hand holding aloft the light of ‘socialism’ shining as the ‘co-operative commonwealth’ whilst the other hand fought the serpent of ‘capitalist constriction’. This came to mind as next month sees the Co-op Party conference at Methodist Central Hall (Methodism and Co-operation – seems appropriate) begin drafting its general election manifesto.

Like the Trade Unions the Co-op movement came into politics for defensive reasons. The sector was badly treated in World War One price controls and rationing schemes where biased to private traders and the Military gave little consideration to Co-op Societies; one was faced with 102 out of 104 male employees being conscripted.

The last straw was Asquith’s clumsy attempt to tackle profiteering, an excess profits tax, which has been described as the co-operators Taff Vale. The 1917 Co-op Congress passed a resolution to “seek direct representation in parliament”. Later that year a National Emergency Conference set up a Central Co-operative Parliamentary Representation Committee and agreed a platform of ‘industrial, social and economic reform’, expressing the movement’s views on profiteering, agriculture, taxation, banking, housing, education foreign policy, and demobilisation, the ‘democratising of state services’, as well as safeguarding the interests of voluntary co-operation and resistance to any legislation that would hamper Co-op progress.

Those issues of profiteering and demobilisation seem somehow topical again. Ten years after its formation in 1927 the Co-op formed an electoral alliance with Labour that has lasted for eighty years. It maybe a relationship that is a throwback to the Labour Party’s federal past but on today’s membership cards its role to ‘promote co-operative values and principles inside and outside the Labour movement, representing all types of co-operative organisation’ could not be more important.

In the Blair years the Party was not immune to ‘modernisation’ General Secretary Peter Hunt attempted to flesh out the concept of the ‘Third Way’ with ideas of new mutualism which where developed with the aid of a new “think tank” Mutuo. Certainly the Party needed better developed co-operative and mutual public policy prescriptions. Unfortunately the ‘Third Way’ for Tony Blair was nothing more than a rhetorical device to cover his rightward drift. Hunt also worked hard on the youngsters around Brown at the Treasury as the best hope for the legislation the Co-op movement needed to make it fit for the 21st century.

For last years 90th birthday Greg Rosen wrote a new short Co-op Part history published as co-operator Gordon Brown was making his ascent to No 10. The Party was full of optimism, writing in the New Statesman; Martin Bright said that “It could be argued that the Co-operative Party is one of the most influential groups of MP’s within Labour. Its chair the international development minister, Gareth Thomas, is a respected figure. Ten cabinet ministers are members as were four of the deputy leadership candidates. All the most influential younger Brown-era ministers are also members (Ed Balls, the Milliband Brothers, Andy Burnham, James Purnell). Could it be”, he asks, “that those searching for a Brownite politics will find it here”?

Somehow I can’t imagine that lot looking for the Co-operative Commonwealth, nonetheless, new Co-op Party General Secretary, Michael Stevenson, has a record Parliamentary Group of thirty members, who maybe a broad church but with the Government looking increasingly bereft of ideas this years Co-op conference could not be timelier. The Party has the enthusiasm and talent of co-operators, from agriculture to housing, financial services to telecommunications, who now run some of Britain’s most successful businesses to call upon.

Many co-operators feel that there has been too much emphasis on selling Labour to the Co-op or putting a cosmetic co-op gloss on health and education reforms rather than ‘promoting’ genuine co-operative solutions to Labour. The true test will be real Co-op measures finding their way into a real Labour manifesto. That is the way to ensure the Co-op Party reaching its centenary.

The Co-operative Dividend Finally Pays Off

2008-07-22T06:24:00.000-07:00

A global financial crisis has woken us up to the benefits of mutual and co-operative business ownership. Converted building societies have found their plc status no protection against poor management and the drying up of international credit. Those remaining mutual, partly shielded by their structure, maybe dull and safe but with global banking in meltdown a dull and safe place is the best place to keep your money.

For some the Co-op was as an anachronism. Politicians paid tribute to its past, to Robert Owen, the Rochdale Pioneers or in Scotland the Fenwick Weavers, implying it had no future. Patronising the sector with warm words when asking for support (or an extension to the overdraft) but privately thinking there was no place in the modern world of shareholder capitalism for a business owned by its customers.

For them the news of the Co-operative Group take over of Somerfield, putting it back amongst the big boys in the retail sector, must seem like seeing Lazarus. Observers of the co-op scene know better, they may not be widely known but the Co-op has in the recent past benefited from some excellent leadership and their efforts are now paying off.

The renaissance began when the Co-op Bank was re-branded as the ethical bank. Its success surprised everyone, including many in the co-op movement, giving confidence, that after years of decline, there was nothing intrinsically uncompetitive about the co-op model.

Society mergers, mostly from weakness, looked to outsiders like the co-op was closing down and in some places it was. Quietly however from dozens of small societies the co-op was forming a new leaner and more effective organisation.

Then last year came the merger that turned the tide. The marriage of the Co-op Group and United Co-operatives, a union from strength rather than weakness meant that at last the Co-op had the critical mass to grow.

Despite the huge challenges of this merger the process of improving the customer experience went on, creating better products, with an emphasis on ethical and fair-trade products, and better stores. Behind the scenes too new IT and logistics systems helped increase sales.

Those new IT systems have enabled the Co-op to bring back the “Divi” in a meaningful way – paying out over £38 million to members this year.

Mergers are no panacea – like some trade union mergers - on paper the new organisation should be as big as the two organisations added together but somehow they end up smaller. This merger was different; the new Group has in the words of CEO Peter Marks the “best opportunity for 50 years to move forward”.

The increased buying power the Somerfield merger will bring will make the whole co-op retail sector more competitive and put an end to some of those Co-op deserts. It will not be easy to create a democratic structure for the new organisation as the new merged Group is only just coming together. But managing growth is far better than managing decline.

At this years Co-op Congress, Kitty Usher Economic Secretary to the Treasury, promised, at long last, a new legal framework to help this modernisation continue. The FSA who have responsibility for regulating the Co-op and mutual sector (you may think that currently they have more pressing responsibilities) have said “it will enable the movement to enjoy the legislative framework it deserves; one fit for this century, rather than the nineteenth.”

With immense patience former Labour MEP Pauline Green and her colleagues at Co-operatives UK have done a good job in cajoling and educating the FSA to take, a sector of some 5000 businesses employing a quarter of a million people, seriously. But a healthy co-op sector is important not just to the one in five of us that have a share in a Co-op.

The new General Secretary of the Co-op Party, Michael Stevenson, has a good story to tell - how by rediscovering its ethical values and democratic principles the co-operative sector has been able to rebuild its business. Could this be a lesson for the Labour Party and the Government?

The Rise and Fall of Cheap Oil

2008-06-12T03:12:00.000-07:00

“Above the fields of Leicestershire
On arches we were borne
And the thunder of the railway drowned
The thunder of the Quorn:
And silver shone the steeples out
Above the barren boughs;
Colts in a paddock ran from us
But not the solid cows:
And quite where Rugby Central is
Does only Rugby know.”

A journey on the old Great Central Railway described by John Betjeman. Many Rugbians today could not find Rugby Central, all that remains is a bump on a bridleway in a disused railway cutting, a long green finger running through the heart of the town, a pleasant place to walk the dog away from the noise of the traffic.

Poems like this helped create that idea that the great days of rail are behind us, killed off by Dr Beeching. Now we know the real killer was cheap oil. Beeching took the flack for closing one third of the rail network and some 2000 stations but he was appointed to head British Rail by, Conservative Transport Minister, Ernest Marples.

Marples made his fortune from the firm he help found, Marples, Ridgway and Partners, road builders (contractors indeed on the M1) he divested himself of his shares on becoming Transport Minister to avoid any conflict of interests – to his wife.

His success was based upon the same cheap oil that did for the railways. At that time most of us would, given the lower costs, greater flexibility and the new found reliability of road transport, built the M1, all those other ‘M’s and closed miles of railways.

Today we are living with the consequences of almost a century’s worth of location decisions based on cheap oil. From the ‘ribbon development’ in the 30’s, encouraged perhaps by that wonderful Shell advertising to the 60’s when the car became accessible to the masses as a symbol of personal freedom. The newly built motorways and trunk roads enabled those in search of the mock-Tudor idyll to leap frog the green belt and for businesses and shops to escape the confines of the cities.

This great dispersal shrank the cities, new towns grew in once green fields, but the new suburbs and towns completely dependent on road transport generated the flip side of dispersal - congestion.

The problem is low population density makes public transport systems uneconomic. Despite the fact that around one third of the population have no access to a car to bring together sufficient people for a football match, a retail centre or even most workplaces requires them to drive. They have little choice - even to the point that this congestion is killing the economy. This new geography locks us into in a high movement high cost society.

To get some idea of the costs involved last year the Seven West Midlands Metropolitan Councils and Centro (the passenger transport authority) sent the Government their wish list for transport improvements it had a £4.6 billion price tag.

This bill, coming in at about half the cost of the complete modernisation of the West Coast Mainline, was far from ambitious, the minimum to keep the metropolitan heart of the region moving they said. The fact the whole region gets around £90 million a year for major transport projects makes it clear that this type of development is unaffordable. This is one conurbation. Imagine the price tag for the whole country.

These numbers made me a convert to road pricing. However having thought longer about it I now realise that of itself road pricing is not enough. The fact is we have fanciful ideas based on that cheap oil about the degree of mobility we can sustain.

It seems those oil futures speculators are not fools – they know we are hopelessly addicted to oil.

When the prices shot up what did the PM, Gordon Brown say? Sell your 4x4, stop flying, or walk to the shops? No he blamed OPEC and demanded more oil from the North Sea.

Now it is not just North Sea oil that is running out. It seems the Greens are right we do not take energy conservation seriously.

Despite the recent huge hike in oil prices the cost of transport is still too low - we have to move to a low movement low cost society and we may only have twenty years to do it.

I am not an extreme Green I believe we have to do this for economic not environmental reasons. We have sold off all our once state owned energy assets making us totally dependent on international markets for our energy. We are a small country with low productivity and a weakening economy we will not be able to afford these ever shrinking resources. The US is already complaining to China and India about there subsidising of their domestic fuel prices.

The economic forces that have enabled long distance travel and long supply chains will soon go into reverse. Many current business models are unsustainable as oil prices grow. No wonder food prices are up. The ludicrously expensive, in transport terms, cost of trucking and shipping, clothes and foodstuffs over vast distances is already becoming uneconomic. Some food production and manufacturing will have to be repatriated.

Planning processes that built the motorways and new towns will now have to plan to recentralise the population and relocalise economic activity. People will simply have to live a great deal closer to schools, shops and work places. (And HM Government please note, GP sugeries and post offices).

As costs escalate some will want to give up their cars and some will be forced too - we have to make it easy for them. There is some truth that with the IT revolution we will be travelling less. But IT also generates new traffic and helps sustain complex long distance supply chains. Despite the constantly threatened immanent arrival of the electric or hydrogen powered car don’t hold your breath there is no technological fix on the horizon.

To return out of town shopping centres and housing to farmland will not be easy and there will be considerable expense in creating a transport infrastructure independent of oil. Completing the electrification of our railways and filling in those Beeching gaps with light rail and trams will not come cheap. The win is of a network that is greener and that will do wonders for our balance of payments.

So how are we to pay for this transport revolution?

So called green taxes have so far not noticeably change behaviour and any revenue has not been spent on alternative sustainable solutions. The problem has always been the Treasury. Its need for the ‘fix’ of the revenue they generate means it never sets tax at levels that really change behaviour.

These taxes have to be a lot higher. Today the price mechanism is beginning to change behaviour but current taxes still have only a very marginal impact on consumers after all since 2005 taxes on road transport have actually fallen.

So where is the money to come from?

The fact that the recent improvements to our rail network are to be paid for by passengers is a clear sign. The user is going to have to pay. We must look again at road pricing. We need a hypothecated tax on road usage for infrastructure improvements. This can be done - we have the technology we should just get on with it.

The challenge is to visibly improve and make cheaper public transport, especially trains and trams, whilst choking off the demand for movement.

It would be unfair to many people who cannot afford to live near where they work to further punish them by increasing what they see as their already excessive transport costs without giving them a real choice.

Unplanned oil price increases have done massive damage before. They cause all kinds of social and economic problems. But this is not a short term problem we can get over but a permanent change.

Effective road pricing can generate a revenue stream to help fund the changes we have to make. Those affluent enough to continue to drive can subsidise those who use public transport. And surely we can come up with varying the charges for essential deliveries or essential workers.

There is less time than we think. We must plan out the need for movement by road. Choosing to carry on as if nothing is happening is foolish in the extreme.

Transport costs are an important component of economic development one of Betjemans other great railway images was that of Metroland an entire landscape enabled by the low cost of cheap suburban trains. With the right planning rules we can do it again.

As socialists we should be pleased that the Thatcherite privatised dream of atomised individuals living in private spaces and travelling alone is coming to an end. Both housing and transport will need collective well planned solutions. Personally I look forward to the reopening of the Great Central as an electric railway and the grassing over of the M1!

Real legacies of Blair, Brown and Smith

2008-05-20T08:25:00.000-07:00

Back in the Guardian after the terrible local and London elections.

My old workmates from the 1997 election (Letters, May 17) seem to have fallen into the first trap of politics - don't believe your own propaganda. The best stuff we implemented after the 1997 victory was nothing to do with Blair or Brown; it was the legacy of John Smith - minimum wage, trade union recognition, social chapter, national devolution, regional development agencies etc. The Brownite stuff (independence for the Bank of England and lax regulation of the financial sector) and the Blairite stuff (permanent revolution in schools and hospitals, tougher on crime than its causes) all looks far less attractive in retrospect. Then there is the elephant in the room of foreign policy. Seven wars in seven years - and what happened to being at the centre of Europe!

More important than the policy failings of Brown - on pensions, post offices, tax relief for the dead while increasing tax on the poorest workers - and something even I didn't realise until last year's floods is just how hopeless he is as a politician. We live in a democracy; you have to go out and meet people and understand them (even the Chinese leader has understood this).

Wake up - the "nice decade" is over. Labour will lose the general election whenever it comes. We are facing the same squeeze that the Tories faced in 1997. Who would have thought that the Conservatives would be the first post-Thatcherite party? The changes we need to make have to be done quickly. We must have a new leader very soon so that defeat can be mitigated, giving us a small chance of regrouping; the alternative is we go into oblivion with Brown.
Nick Matthews
(Labour's policy officer for trade and industry and employment in 1997), Rugby

Nick Rocks in the Guardian

2008-02-19T04:37:00.000-08:00

Dear Editor,

Labour have at last found the bottle to 'nationalise' something. I hope they get the taste for it. They should come out fighting on Northern Rock. None of the Building Societies that converted to Banks have been seen to be viable long term businesses. With Northern Rock eight out of ten have been eaten up by bigger banks reducing competition in the mortgage sector. Only Bradford and Bingley and the Alliance and Leicester remain - how long do we give them as independent businesses? Demutualisation was a stupid piece of Thatcherite dogma. Financial engineering that stole millions in value from members to enrich managers whilst producing higher mortgages for millions. Labour should not apologise for clearing up this Conservative mess. My only complaint is that they should do more of it clearing up the similar mess the Tories created in other sectors like the railways and the utilities.

Yours sincerely,

Nick Matthews

Remembering Duncan

2008-02-13T04:02:00.000-08:00

"The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there."

The very moving events marking the fiftieth anniversary of the Munich Air Disaster have shone a light into L.P.Harley’s foreign country that is the past in a very interesting way. The world of 1958 and in particular the footballing world of 1958 could not be more different from the footballing world of today.

Take for example the description in the Daily Mail of Manchester United's 2007 pre-Christmas Party.

“United's 19-year-old defender Jonny Evans was questioned today over the alleged rape of a woman at the club's party before being bailed until February 23 pending further inquiries. The players had reportedly paid £100,000 for Monday's party and invited around 100 girls back to the £395-a-night Manchester hotel. The event is said to have been organised by Ferdinand who is reported to have held a whip round to which 25 players gave £4,000 each. Wives and girlfriends were not invited.
…. A total of 35 players, including many multi-million pound stars, began the day with lunch at the Manchester235 casino complex where they were entertained by drag queens and dancers. After three hours, stars such as Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes, Gary Neville and Owen Hargreaves, accompanied by junior squad members, headed to Coronation Street star Liz Dawn's pub The Old Grapes for more drinking.

Later a group including Rooney and Ferdinand drove to a lapdancing club but left without going inside after seeing photographers outside. For the night they had booked out the 30-suite Great St John Street Hotel - a converted Victorian school featured in top hotel guides - where they continued partying into the early hours. One female guest described the party as "a horrendous cattle market" She said: "I like the United players but they were out of control. They were treating girls like pieces of meat. "We got special invites but if we ever get asked again there's no way we would go again." Another said: "A lot of the players were really letting their hair down. Waitresses were handing out pink champagne to whoever wanted it.
"The players seemed to be drinking beer, vodka and whisky. Lots of drink was flowing and there were a lot of the girls there simply trying to bag a footballer for the night. It was all very sleazy."

As Rod Liddle said in the Times , “Yes, of course, the whole business is vile and repulsive on a scale we should, by rights, feel difficult to comprehend. But these days we comprehend it all too well. The obscene extravagance of the party, the gallons of pink champagne flowing down the gullets of pampered and witless imbeciles, the coarseness, the sheer utilitarian intent behind that noble tradition, the harvesting of the slappers. But it would surely not surprise anyone any more. Almost everything our Premier League footballers do is an affront to decency, the result of fairly stupid young people being afforded unlimited incomes and unlimited adulation.
These players think that they can do anything, without censure. By and large they are right. But our sympathies should not be with the equally witless young women who, in effect, colluded in this moronic festival. It should instead be with the state of our national game and with the fans who subsidise such behavior.”

It is that type of behavior that I think that is part of the reason we look back to 1958 with such fondness, it is not simply with rose tinted glasses, there is certainly a degree of nostalgia but nostalgia for the values of a lost age. Compare that coverage on the United players of today with the coverage from the Guardian of old fans who congregated at Old Trafford to remember the exact moment 50 years earlier when the Munich tragedy occurred.

People like Derek Taylor, a supporter for more than 50 years, who carried flowers and a remembrance card with the words from The Flowers Of Manchester, a poem and song tribute to the victims. Taylor was a newspaper copy boy at the time of the crash. "I took the copy from the teleprinter announcing that the aeroplane had crashed," he said. "I was totally devastated. It was just unbelievable, like losing one of your family.

"When I first met Duncan Edwards, he used to come to Old Trafford on a bike. When they realised their value had gone up, the club told them they had to come on a bus!
"Sir Matt Busby used to turn up in his car, put his arm around my shoulder and ask, 'How's my team playing for me?' He was like a granddad for the fans."

In Germany, hundreds of fans attended a memorial service at the site of the tragedy outside Munich. But if the day was marked by solemnity, it was also leavened by moments of humour, not least at a tribute hosted by the television presenter and United fan Eamonn Holmes. The Babes' goalkeeper, Harry Gregg, who risked his own life to pull three others from the plane wreckage, recalled how he returned to the football field just two weeks after the crash.
"We didn't have counsellors or psychologists - trick cyclists, I call them - in those days, we just got on with it. There was no point in sitting at home moping," he said.

Nobby Stiles, a 15-year-old apprentice with United in 1958, and later a 1966 World Cup winner, assessed the talents of those who died, including Duncan Edwards ("The greatest player I've ever seen") and Eddie Coleman ("My idol").

As ever, though, Sir Bobby Charlton, who went on to fulfil the lost legacy of fallen colleagues by winning the European Cup in 1968, fashioned the perfect epitaph for a glorious team.
"I'll never forget what Sir Matt said to us one day when he pointed across to Trafford Park, which at the time was the largest industrial estate in Europe," he said, his voice cracking with emotion. "He told us: 'The people over there work hard all week long and it is your job to go out on the field and provide them with some entertainment'.
"And that is what we tried to do; we played for the team, for the club and for the country."

Be in no doubt football in the 1930’s, 40’s and into the 1950’s was the theatre of the working class.

J.B.Priestley in the opening chapter of The Good Companions (1929) said :

"To say that these men paid their shillings to watch 22 hirelings kick a ball is merely to say that a violin is wood and catgut, that Hamlet is so much paper and ink... for not only had you escaped from the clanking machinery of this lesser life, from work, wages, rent, doles, sick pay, insurance cards, nagging wives, ailing children, bad bosses, idle workmen, but you had escaped with most of your mates and your neighbours, with half the town, and there you were, cheering together, thumping one another on the shoulders, swopping judgments like lords of the earth, having pushed your way through a turnstile into another and altogether more splendid kind of life, hurtling with conflict and yet passionate and beautiful in its art."

Priestly was far from being naive about the role of commercialism in football even before the war in An English Journey, his account of a tour of the country in 1933, he describes a game between Notts County and Notts Forest:

“Nearly everything possible has been done to spoil this game; the heavy financial interests; the absurd transfer and player selling system; the lack of any birth or residential qualification for the players; the betting and coupon competitions; the absurd publicity given to every feature of it by the Press; the monstrous partisanship of the crowds (with their idiotic cries of 'play the game Ref' when any decision against their side is given); but the fact remains that it is not yet spoilt and it has gone out to conquer the world.”

I would contend that in 1958, the game was still, “not yet spoilt”, thanks to post-war austerity football was still cheap and attracted huge crowds desperate for some entertainment. Enter into this era the "Busby babes"!

Matt Busby had arrived at Manchester United in 1946 after a pre-war career as a player with Manchester City and Liverpool. Born in a miner's cottage in North Lanarkshire his father and all his uncles had been killed in the First World War. He was an immediate success with United , FA Cup winners in 1948, football league runners up in 1947, 48, 49 and 51 before winning the title in 1952. It was however his commitment to young players that set him apart. United won the FA Youth Cup, in 1954, 55, 56 and 57. The club bought no players at all for three seasons between the 1953/54 and 1956/57. The youngsters he bought through gained United the league championship in 1956 and 1957.

Of these youngsters the best of the bunch signing for United when he was 16 in 1952 was a lad from Dudley. A lad who had played for Wolverhampton Street School, Dudley Schools, Worcestershire County and Birmingham and District and had made his debut for England School Boys at just 14.

Wolves who the Daily Mail had christened the Champions of the World after they had beaten Honved in December 1954 had missed out on Duncan and on what might have been.

As Robert Philip wrote in the Daily Telegraph,

"As early as 1948, a handwritten letter from United's chief scout in the Midlands, Jack O'Brien, landed on Busby's desk. "Have today seen a 12-year-old schoolboy who merits special watching. His name is Duncan Edwards, of Dudley. Instructions please." O'Brien's recommendation was promptly passed on to coach Bert Whalley with the added instructions: "Please arrange special watch immediately - MB."

With the young man in question turning out for Wolverhampton Street Secondary School, Dudley Schools XI, Worcester County XI and Birmingham & District XI, arranging a 'special watch' represented something of a full-time occupation. At the age of 13, he walked out at Wembley on April 1, 1950, to win his first 'cap' for England Schoolboys against Wales Schoolboys in front of a crowd of 100,000; at 14 he was appointed England Schools captain - a position he would hold for two seasons.

With Wolverhampton Wanderers hovering, on June 2, 1952, United pounced, Whalley banging on the Edwards front door at 31 Elm Road on the threadbare Priory council estate at 2am, brandishing amateur forms. Having put pen to paper, young Duncan, still in his pyjamas, left Whalley and his father, Gladstone, to sort out the details while he climbed the stairs to bed, muttering: "I don't know what all this fuss was about. I've said all along that Manchester United were the only club I wanted to join."

Ten months later Edwards made his first-team debut at left-half aged 16 years and 183 days against Cardiff City at Old Trafford; not that the date April 4, 1953, is writ large in the history of Manchester United, a 4-1 defeat leaving the reigning champions in the no-man's land of mid-table. Busby was fully aware that despite his side's league title success the previous season, the majority of the United players belonged to the over-the-hill gang and Edwards' fellow 'Babes', David Pegg, Dennis Viollet, Bill Foulkes, Mark Jones and Jackie Blanchflower, were also introduced during the closing weeks of the season."

His personality shines through in the comments people make of him, "A permanent fixture in the England Under-23 side from the age of 17, United's teenage sorcerer may have grown in fame with every passing game but he remained engagingly modest throughout his all-too-brief career. "He might have been the Koh-i-Noor diamond among our crown jewels," Murphy explained, "but he was an unspoiled boy to the end, his head the same size it had been from the start. Even when he had won his first England cap but was still eligible for our youth team, he used to love turning out with the rest of the youngsters. He just loved to play anywhere and with anyone." (He had one known vice as a child - as well as representing his school at football, he was also a member of the Morris dancing team.)"

What Morris Dancing in Dudley! He continues,

"According to Busby, ". . . the bigger the occasion the better he liked it", and there were few bigger occasions than England's 1956 international against World Cup holders West Germany in the Olympic Stadium in Berlin, where Edwards scored a goal. With 25 minutes gone and the score 0-0, he gained possession on the edge of his own penalty area and set off on a run that left a trail of West Germans in his wake before smashing the ball into the net from 25 yards."

"By the mid-fifties Manchester United had caught the imagination of the country. Duncan Edwards played his first game for the club in 1953, at the age of fifteen years and eight months. Two years later he won his first England cap and Walter Winterbottom, then England manager, referred to him as ‘the spirit of British football’. On £15 a week and living at Mrs Watson’s boarding house at 5 Birch Avenue in Manchester, Edwards was the most prized of the ‘Busby Babes’."

Writes Gordon Burn in his book Best and Edwards. Duncan was no saint after all he did two years national service in the army as 23145376 Lance Corporal Edwards D. He did most of his 2 years at the Ammunition Depot at Nescliff on the Welsh border, serving in the same regiment as Bobby Charlton.

In the Daily Telegraph John Russell, who was 23-year-old civil servant in 1957 and acquaintance of Edwards said, "I knew him faintly. I'd see him riding around on his bike near my home in Sale. I'd meet him in the Ashton on Mersey cricket club. We used to bump into the United lads going to the match, walking down the Warwick Road to the ground, or on a Saturday night in the Plaza or Ritz ballroom in Manchester or the Sale Locarno. We'd chat to them, say 'Good match, Dunc'." Munich was such a tragedy."

James Lawton in the Independent asked the question, was Duncan, "The greatest Footballer that ever lived?"

The tragedy of 1958 meant that, "there will be one regret above all others. It was that we never got to see if it really was true that Duncan Edwards was the greatest player who, despite his epic fight, never got to live. Not in the fullness of his talent. Not in the haunting reach of all his possibilities."

On his debut Duncan was the youngest player to play in the First Division he played, 177 games for United scoring 21 goals, and received 18 England Caps scoring five times. He once scored 6 goals in an England under 23 match playing as a centre forward.

He is one of those lost boys whose story gets stronger in the telling as the values of now and then collide. We cannot believe that modern players with all their money and their boorish behaviour are a patch on the players of old. For all their wealth they do not have the common touch and how can they? Making more in one week than the players then made in a lifetime. Television corrupts everything it comes into contact with and part of the joy of celebrating Duncan's life is that there are so few pictures or so little film of his playing days.

When I visited his Grave twenty five years ago it was subject to vandalism even then and was not easy to find in the Stourbridge Road Cemetery today there is a statue in the Market Place and an exhibition at the Museum to join the glass windows in the St Francis Church in Laurel Road. His family and in particular his mum worked all their lives to tend his memory. His father, Gladstone, actually ended up working at the cemetary and his mum turned their home, on Elm Road , into a shrine to Duncans playing career. Much of the contents can now be seen in Dudley Museum. Sarah Anne Edwards passed away on 15th April 2003, aged 93.

Still it's good to know that a lad born on Woodside and raised on the Priory is still considered by Bobby Charlton as the best he ever played with.

"He was incomparable, I feel terrible trying to explain to people just how good he was, his death was the biggest single tragedy ever to happen to Manchester United and English football. I always felt I could compare well with any player - except Duncan. He was such a talent, I always felt inferior to him. He didn't have a fault with his game".

For more about Duncan in Dudley see: www.duncan-edwards.co.uk