As a child of a “bog standard” comprehensive and an advocate of comprehensive education I have been horrified by the return to a class based selective education system. Selection achieved not by examination but by geography. Living in the right street or going to the right church gets your child into the ‘right’ school.
We never had a truly comprehensive system - the pernicious influence of the public schools and the church was always felt. Now the changes that began under the Tories, reinforced by New Labour, are reaching fruition with the Condems and can be seen for what they are privatisation and rationing. The mantra of ‘choice’ means schools choose pupils rather than pupils’ schools and the tyranny of testing means there is precious little time for any real education to take place during school time.
Working class education is a relatively recent phenomenon. It was on New Years Day in 1816 that Robert Owen opened, the Institute for the Formation of Character, in New Lanark, establishing Britain’s first primary school.
We can see how out of touch Owen was, he set no targets, children where controlled by kindness and affection with no punishments permitted, there where no prizes given that might encourage individual emulation, instead the emphasis was on a co-operative search for knowledge that would be its own reward. Today these ideas will not even get you the keys to a “Free School”.
As far back as the formation of the Rochdale Pioneers Society back in 1844 education has been one of the co-op principles. Yet despite the movement establishing its own college in 1919 the idea of ‘co-operative education’ in its more holistic sense has been an aspiration rather than a reality because it goes against most educational practice. Co-operative learning has two sides on one is the pedagogy, the way to learn co-operatively, the other is as a way of learning about co-operation as part of an alternative social and economic system.
These complex multi-facetted ideas about co-operative education have been bought together in a special issue of the Co-operative Studies Journal. Guest edited by Maureen Breeze, Co-President of the International Association for the Study of Co-operation in Education, with support from Alan Wilkins of Co-operative Learning and Development Associates and Richard Bickle Secretary of the UK Society for Co-operative Studies.
It contains some substantial articles that put co-operation in education into focus and are followed by 27 accounts of the huge range of practice here in the UK. It is gratifying that there is so much thinking about an alternative educational philosophy in these troubled times.
Maureen in her introduction argues, that “The intention of the Journal is to provide a platform from which to investigate and develop understandings of the breadth of meanings and representations variously described as co-operation in education as well as bringing some coherence to those approaches.”
Many contributors and practitioners in the field have found themselves isolated but by bringing so many together to produce the special issue of the journal co-operatively something really special has been achieved.
Owen was right that education has for its object the formation of character. But so too was Bertrand Russell when in his seminal book, On Education in 1928, he wrote “We must have some conception of the type of person we wish to produce, before we can have a definite opinion as to the education we consider best.”
Our present system does seem to propel those from the “best” schools and “best” universities to the top. Yet as examples of their output, David Cameron and George Osborne display astonishing levels of ignorance and a complete lack of empathy with their fellow citizens. Their socio-pathology shows us something is very wrong with the education they have received unless of course their arrogance, ignorance and greed are the desired outputs?
What is clear is that inviting students to compete as rivals for grades means they work against one another a process described as negative interdependence. Alternatively co-operative learning, working together to accomplish shared goals, creates positive interdependence, achieved when students learn that they can only reach their desired goals, if and only if, the other students in the group reach those same goals.
Co-operative learning can be seen as a form of experiential learning, as US author John Holt points out, “children cannot learn all that much from cookbooks (instruction and textbooks) new or old because they do not learn effectively by trying to transplant someone else’s reality into their own but by building up their own reality from the experiences they encounter.”
This Journal contains a wealth of experience from schools, adult, further and higher education, there is even a piece by a sixteen year old member of the Woodcraft Folk an organisation that could teach us all a great deal about effective learning.
We are facing some deeply challenging questions as the government dismantles the state education system, can you have a genuinely co-operative school within the context of these changes? As Maureen says, “By finding a way to bring these all together and harnessing the combined energy, knowledge, experience and practice, we could truly embrace the potential for transforming education through co-operation and become a force for change.”
That change cannot come soon enough this really is a splendid and timely publication if you are interested in obtaining a copy go to: www.co-opstudies.org
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
Friday, 16 March 2012
Fairtrade and Co-operation
No one who has been involved in the Fair Trade movement could be failed to be moved by encounters with the producers they meet from the developing world. I have had the honour this year to meet Palestinian farmers from Zaytoun and Ugandan co-operative women coffee growers. This is what the movement is all about putting the producers in contact with the consumers avoiding the alienation and mystification of the ‘market’ and despite the downturn this year’s total sales of fait trade products should reach £1.3 billion.
If nothing else showing, at a time when incomes are tight, that consumers do have a conscience. Today corporations do everything they can to hide exploitation, yet we all know how conventional marketing masks the gross inequalities between producers and consumer, asking consumers to fixate on the commodity.
It’s a long way from the early days of ‘suitcase trade’ when visitors, mainly missionaries, bought suitcases of handicrafts back from the developing world to sell amongst their communities and parishes.
That process of direct contacts between consumers and producers making trade fair was systemised by organisations like Oxfam Trading, the Dutch Fair Trade Organisatie and the Christian based Traidcraft. Their mission was about building relationships and drawing explicit attention to the production process.
Today the base of the Fair Trade system is the huge numbers of producer co-operatives representing small farmers in poor countries producing over three quarters of all fair trade commodities. It was by the formation of these producer co-ops that farmers sought to bypass the monopolists and penetrate western markets. Only co-op control could guarantee that the fair trade premium was distributed fairly and used for wider community benefit. The democratic control embodied in the co-op model was therefore crucial to the system.
Thanks to the Fair Trade mark however the system may be now becoming a victim of its success. The development of the ‘label’ makes a huge difference to the process. It enables consumers to distinguish fairly trade products from ordinary ones and the labelling organisations have become the backbone of the movement.
Originally, however, the movement had a vision of a global trade system built on moral rather than market values. I believe that original objective has been compromised by collaboration with transnational corporations to gain market access. This means that the producer co-ops are once again becoming dependent on the transnational corporations for their survival – the very thing from which they were seeking to escape.
Many argue that Fair Trade is about reforming how markets work and that the contagious Fair Trade mark has been forcing companies to reform their practices even if just for cosmetic reasons and that it has highlighted trade injustices including the complicity of the WTO and IMF in creating an unfair world trade system.
There is some truth in this but even the strongest advocate of fair trade labelling would agree that the movement has not fundamentally changed the underlying imbalance between consumers and producers.
Today, for example, despite the fair trade critique of the system between 70% and 90% of the major commodities are marketed by just 15 transnational companies. The closer we get to the consumer the more concentrated is their power. In coffee, the most traded global commodity after oil, just 6 companies control 50% of the total market. Indeed just two, very well known companies, control half of the market for roast and ground coffee.
Just as co-operatives have fundamentally changed the lives of many poor farmers in the developing world, improving their lives and strengthening their communities, there is a need for co-operative steps to take this further.
We need to make co-operative systems central to the remaking of economies at the growing, picking, and hauling end of the market by helping them to diversify from often single cash crops by leveraging the relationships and capital that comes from fair-trade to localise expertise, resources and co-operative commercial systems.
We need to devise local strategies for accessing global market and there are co-operative ways of doing this too. There is also a need for a formal link between the Fair Trade and Co-operative Movements.
We need to have a wholly co-operative supply chain. There are examples of this on a small scale. Like the way Edinburgh workers co-op, Equal Exchange, creators of direct trading relationships between producers and consumers brings Zaytoun olive oil into the UK from the Palestinian Fair Trade Association which is a group of eight producer co-ops, oil that is then on sale in co-op shops here in the UK.
Other examples include the way the Kuapa Kokoo co-op from Ghana with help and investment has established its own brand of chocolate, Divine, here in the UK capturing more of the value in the supply chain. There are also Co-op Wholesalers like Essential Trading in Bristol, Infinity in Brighton and Suma in Elland in Yorkshire.
All of them work to build genuine relationships with suppliers.
These may seem small scale examples, proof of a principle, perhaps and may not generate the spectacular growth in Fair Trade sales of persuading Nestle to put a fair trade mark on a Kit Kat. In the long run however keeping farmers out of clutches of the transnational corporations is the only way to build a lasting genuinely fair trading system.
If nothing else showing, at a time when incomes are tight, that consumers do have a conscience. Today corporations do everything they can to hide exploitation, yet we all know how conventional marketing masks the gross inequalities between producers and consumer, asking consumers to fixate on the commodity.
It’s a long way from the early days of ‘suitcase trade’ when visitors, mainly missionaries, bought suitcases of handicrafts back from the developing world to sell amongst their communities and parishes.
That process of direct contacts between consumers and producers making trade fair was systemised by organisations like Oxfam Trading, the Dutch Fair Trade Organisatie and the Christian based Traidcraft. Their mission was about building relationships and drawing explicit attention to the production process.
Today the base of the Fair Trade system is the huge numbers of producer co-operatives representing small farmers in poor countries producing over three quarters of all fair trade commodities. It was by the formation of these producer co-ops that farmers sought to bypass the monopolists and penetrate western markets. Only co-op control could guarantee that the fair trade premium was distributed fairly and used for wider community benefit. The democratic control embodied in the co-op model was therefore crucial to the system.
Thanks to the Fair Trade mark however the system may be now becoming a victim of its success. The development of the ‘label’ makes a huge difference to the process. It enables consumers to distinguish fairly trade products from ordinary ones and the labelling organisations have become the backbone of the movement.
Originally, however, the movement had a vision of a global trade system built on moral rather than market values. I believe that original objective has been compromised by collaboration with transnational corporations to gain market access. This means that the producer co-ops are once again becoming dependent on the transnational corporations for their survival – the very thing from which they were seeking to escape.
Many argue that Fair Trade is about reforming how markets work and that the contagious Fair Trade mark has been forcing companies to reform their practices even if just for cosmetic reasons and that it has highlighted trade injustices including the complicity of the WTO and IMF in creating an unfair world trade system.
There is some truth in this but even the strongest advocate of fair trade labelling would agree that the movement has not fundamentally changed the underlying imbalance between consumers and producers.
Today, for example, despite the fair trade critique of the system between 70% and 90% of the major commodities are marketed by just 15 transnational companies. The closer we get to the consumer the more concentrated is their power. In coffee, the most traded global commodity after oil, just 6 companies control 50% of the total market. Indeed just two, very well known companies, control half of the market for roast and ground coffee.
Just as co-operatives have fundamentally changed the lives of many poor farmers in the developing world, improving their lives and strengthening their communities, there is a need for co-operative steps to take this further.
We need to make co-operative systems central to the remaking of economies at the growing, picking, and hauling end of the market by helping them to diversify from often single cash crops by leveraging the relationships and capital that comes from fair-trade to localise expertise, resources and co-operative commercial systems.
We need to devise local strategies for accessing global market and there are co-operative ways of doing this too. There is also a need for a formal link between the Fair Trade and Co-operative Movements.
We need to have a wholly co-operative supply chain. There are examples of this on a small scale. Like the way Edinburgh workers co-op, Equal Exchange, creators of direct trading relationships between producers and consumers brings Zaytoun olive oil into the UK from the Palestinian Fair Trade Association which is a group of eight producer co-ops, oil that is then on sale in co-op shops here in the UK.
Other examples include the way the Kuapa Kokoo co-op from Ghana with help and investment has established its own brand of chocolate, Divine, here in the UK capturing more of the value in the supply chain. There are also Co-op Wholesalers like Essential Trading in Bristol, Infinity in Brighton and Suma in Elland in Yorkshire.
All of them work to build genuine relationships with suppliers.
These may seem small scale examples, proof of a principle, perhaps and may not generate the spectacular growth in Fair Trade sales of persuading Nestle to put a fair trade mark on a Kit Kat. In the long run however keeping farmers out of clutches of the transnational corporations is the only way to build a lasting genuinely fair trading system.
Monday, 27 February 2012
Time for an Energy "New Deal" for Londoners
I was delighted to hear candidate for London Mayor Ken Livingston talk about creating a London wide energy co-operative. He was taking a leaf out of the book of the greatest of all US Presidents Franklin Delaware Roosevelt. It was in 1933 when the Roosevelt administration passed the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Act authorizing the TVA Board to construct transmission lines to serve “farms and small villages that are not otherwise supplied with electricity at reasonable rates,” this opened up rural America for co-operative energy.
In the thirties US farms relied on kerosene lamps, hand milking, the wood stove and the washboard. Today 99 per cent of US farms have electricity. The vehicle that bought electricity to this vast country was not capitalism, investor-owned utilities refused to invest as they felt there was insufficient revenue to justify the capital expenditure on the required infrastructure, it was co-operation.
Today almost all of rural America gets its electricity from co-ops and many have joined together to form wholesale generation and transmission (G&T) businesses to supply their member-owners with electricity. In the US today there are 841 distribution co-ops and 65 G&T’s supplying electricity to 42 million customer members in 47 states. They strive to bring the best service to their members at the lowest possible cost and despite the fact that supplying rural areas is more expensive than cities some have managed to be cost effective enough to enter urban markets.
The US national brand of energy co-ops is Touchstone Energy; their slogan is the power of human connections. They bring innovation and a national network to deliver energy to 27 million owner members every day. They argue their success is down to the co-op business model putting customers first. They deliver energy to their members at the cost of the service. Compared to investor-owned utilities which distribute their profits to investors across the world — not necessarily to those they serve.
Whilst an Energy New Deal for Londoners would be an excellent program, here in the UK energy co-operatives are one of the fastest growing sectors of the co-op economy. It seems quietly the UK population is taking power into their own hands. Statistics realised by Co-operatives UK at the tail end of 2011 show a 24% rise in the number of ‘member owned’ energy co-operative enterprises in the last four years.
The Co-op UK figures show that member owned energy organisations are the fastest growth area for co-operative enterprise in the country. The data was released with a comprehensive Co-operatives UK research report on the sector, The Co-operative Green Economy by Pat Conaty.
Ed Mayo, General Secretary of Co-operatives UK pointed out that “The big six energy companies are still the giants in the market, but grassroots co-operatives are now organising under their feet.”
The most significant of the new Co-op energy suppliers is, Which Consumer Action award winning, Co-operative Energy set up by the Midcounties Co-op as an alternative to the big six energy companies. Nigel Mason, of Co-op Energy says, “Co-operatives empower people and result in tangible improvements to people’s lives and energy is one example of where joint action makes more sense than isolation. We started Co-operative Energy to challenge the major energy suppliers to treat consumers fairly, bringing co-operative values to a mistrusted sector.”
On a different scale Sheffield Renewables a co-operative which develops, funds, builds, owns and operates renewable energy schemes, is run by local people, for local people. It is an example of a new and growing form of energy co-operative, which is raising investment from the local community to generate energy from hydro-electric power. Mark Wells, member and Development Manager, says “The work we do is one which allows communities to work together to develop and own local renewable energy schemes. This is empowering and at the same time keeps people in touch with the climate change debate and their effect on the environment. In our case, profits will help support development of further local renewable energy supplies.”
To date there are 43 communities who are already producing renewable energy. Local residents have invested £16 million in these schemes, ranging from over £2 million in a wind farm in Oxfordshire through to smaller sums to install solar panels. But there are factors holding back the development of these schemes and this is where a pro-active Mayor can make a difference. There are barriers facing communities including: shifting government legislation, planning hurdles and bureaucracy that makes it hard for local schemes to establish themselves.
River Bain Hydro, for example, has successfully set up a hydro electric scheme in North Yorkshire, but had to spend a huge proportion of its limited time negotiating with power companies because of a lack of co-ordination. As they explain: “Between the power house and the grid, a distance of a hundred yards, we ended up with five different organisations involved in delivery.”
Paul Monaghan, Head of Social Goals at The Co-operative Group, says: “The potential for a community-led clean energy revolution in the UK is enormous. Countries like Germany and Denmark have shown us the way. With The Co-operative Bank’s commitment to invest £1 billion in renewable energy by 2013, and our broader support for co-operative enterprise, we are ready to help realise the significant benefits that community energy can deliver for society and communities.”
So with a Billion pounds of potential investment and a pro-active Mayor the light at the end of the tunnel for Londoners could be powered by co-operative electricity!
For information the Report: The Co-operative Green Economy can be found at: www.uk.coop/energy And if you want to check out Co-op Energy go to: www.cooperativeenergy.coop
In the thirties US farms relied on kerosene lamps, hand milking, the wood stove and the washboard. Today 99 per cent of US farms have electricity. The vehicle that bought electricity to this vast country was not capitalism, investor-owned utilities refused to invest as they felt there was insufficient revenue to justify the capital expenditure on the required infrastructure, it was co-operation.
Today almost all of rural America gets its electricity from co-ops and many have joined together to form wholesale generation and transmission (G&T) businesses to supply their member-owners with electricity. In the US today there are 841 distribution co-ops and 65 G&T’s supplying electricity to 42 million customer members in 47 states. They strive to bring the best service to their members at the lowest possible cost and despite the fact that supplying rural areas is more expensive than cities some have managed to be cost effective enough to enter urban markets.
The US national brand of energy co-ops is Touchstone Energy; their slogan is the power of human connections. They bring innovation and a national network to deliver energy to 27 million owner members every day. They argue their success is down to the co-op business model putting customers first. They deliver energy to their members at the cost of the service. Compared to investor-owned utilities which distribute their profits to investors across the world — not necessarily to those they serve.
Whilst an Energy New Deal for Londoners would be an excellent program, here in the UK energy co-operatives are one of the fastest growing sectors of the co-op economy. It seems quietly the UK population is taking power into their own hands. Statistics realised by Co-operatives UK at the tail end of 2011 show a 24% rise in the number of ‘member owned’ energy co-operative enterprises in the last four years.
The Co-op UK figures show that member owned energy organisations are the fastest growth area for co-operative enterprise in the country. The data was released with a comprehensive Co-operatives UK research report on the sector, The Co-operative Green Economy by Pat Conaty.
Ed Mayo, General Secretary of Co-operatives UK pointed out that “The big six energy companies are still the giants in the market, but grassroots co-operatives are now organising under their feet.”
The most significant of the new Co-op energy suppliers is, Which Consumer Action award winning, Co-operative Energy set up by the Midcounties Co-op as an alternative to the big six energy companies. Nigel Mason, of Co-op Energy says, “Co-operatives empower people and result in tangible improvements to people’s lives and energy is one example of where joint action makes more sense than isolation. We started Co-operative Energy to challenge the major energy suppliers to treat consumers fairly, bringing co-operative values to a mistrusted sector.”
On a different scale Sheffield Renewables a co-operative which develops, funds, builds, owns and operates renewable energy schemes, is run by local people, for local people. It is an example of a new and growing form of energy co-operative, which is raising investment from the local community to generate energy from hydro-electric power. Mark Wells, member and Development Manager, says “The work we do is one which allows communities to work together to develop and own local renewable energy schemes. This is empowering and at the same time keeps people in touch with the climate change debate and their effect on the environment. In our case, profits will help support development of further local renewable energy supplies.”
To date there are 43 communities who are already producing renewable energy. Local residents have invested £16 million in these schemes, ranging from over £2 million in a wind farm in Oxfordshire through to smaller sums to install solar panels. But there are factors holding back the development of these schemes and this is where a pro-active Mayor can make a difference. There are barriers facing communities including: shifting government legislation, planning hurdles and bureaucracy that makes it hard for local schemes to establish themselves.
River Bain Hydro, for example, has successfully set up a hydro electric scheme in North Yorkshire, but had to spend a huge proportion of its limited time negotiating with power companies because of a lack of co-ordination. As they explain: “Between the power house and the grid, a distance of a hundred yards, we ended up with five different organisations involved in delivery.”
Paul Monaghan, Head of Social Goals at The Co-operative Group, says: “The potential for a community-led clean energy revolution in the UK is enormous. Countries like Germany and Denmark have shown us the way. With The Co-operative Bank’s commitment to invest £1 billion in renewable energy by 2013, and our broader support for co-operative enterprise, we are ready to help realise the significant benefits that community energy can deliver for society and communities.”
So with a Billion pounds of potential investment and a pro-active Mayor the light at the end of the tunnel for Londoners could be powered by co-operative electricity!
For information the Report: The Co-operative Green Economy can be found at: www.uk.coop/energy And if you want to check out Co-op Energy go to: www.cooperativeenergy.coop
Friday, 10 February 2012
Move Your Money
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
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
Monday, 30 January 2012
Time for a Moratorium on the Use of “John Lewis Model”!
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!
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!
Tuesday, 17 January 2012
Consumer Co-op's in Japan
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.
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
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
