‘SHOCKING: WATER COMPANIES WANT YOU TO PAY MORE TO CLEAN UP THEIR MESS. [1]
Water companies have APOLOGISED for sewage spilling into our rivers and seas, and announced that they would FINALLY proceed with the upgrades we have been demanding – to the tune of £10 billion. [2]
But that’s not the whole story!
It was also revealed that we – their customers – will be footing the bill. [3] Then, to add insult to injury, these same companies are still planning to give out shareholder dividends of £14.7 billion from our increased bills at the same time. [4] It’s an outrage!
Thankfully, this has yet to be approved by Ofwat, the water regulator, and we have some time to show these companies how strongly the public is against these plans. If we get thousands of signatures on a petition demanding no bonuses for CEOs or dividends for shareholders, we can pressure them to put a stop to this unjust system – and take responsibility for cleaning up their mess once and for all.
So, David, if you think water companies should be footing this bill and not us – their customers – add your name to this petition today:click the button below and your name will be added automatically.
No bonuses or dividends while you hike our bills to clean up the mess you made.Why is this important?Although the announcement of investment in our sewer network is welcome – your customers cannot be expected to foot the bill.The lack of investment and funding since water companies went private is not the public’s fault and therefore the onus to fix this should not be on us. And we definitely shouldn’t be paying a penny more for as long as shareholders and executives are still getting bonuses and dividends.SignedThousands of your customers
Our pressure is working but we cannot take our foot off the pedal. Sign the petition below and demand water companies stop this bill hike if shareholders are still being paid.Click the button below and your name will be added automatically.
I’ve signed it, because I strongly believe that it’s outrageous that customers should be charged for cleaning up the mess solely so that the companies can keep their boosted profits for their shareholders and senior staff, and I hope you’ll sign too.
Earlier this week the Spectator published a noxious piece by its noxious editor, Fraser Nelson. Nelson was complaining about the numbers receiving sickness benefit while businesses in Britain are struggling to recruit workers. This included, he said, army officers with a beginning salary of £35,000. From what I could gather, the thrust of his article was that the people on sick leave and benefits should be taken off them and then forced to go into one of these vacant jobs. This has been followed by various other right-wing politicians declaring that they intend to retrain the long-term sick to fill these vacancies. The implication here is the old Blairite assumption about people on disability benefits that a certain proportion of them, at least, must be malingerers. It’s why the work capability assessment was set up to find a certain percentage of claimants fit for work, whether they were or not, and the consequent scandals of genuinely critical disabled and terminally ill people being thrown off benefits and told to get a job. It’s the attitude behind the New Labour and the Tories’ wretched benefit reforms, which not only demands claimants look for work and have their searches checked by the staff, but also has them thrown off benefits and sanctioned on the slightest pretext. If they’re starting on the long term sick, it probably indicates that they’ve gone as far as they can demonising and humiliating the unemployed and have been forced to start demonising and humiliating the sick. It’s also based on the unsympathetic attitude that working is good for you and will get you back on your feet. This was the attitude a few years ago when Dave Cameron’s coalition government came to power, and disability campaigners tore into that, showing that this simply wasn’t the case. There seems to be no awareness that some people are sick because of their jobs and working conditions. As for the mental health crisis hitting Britain, it isn’t due to Gary Lineker spreading fears about climate change, as Richard Tice has declared. It’s far more to do with the cost of living crisis caused by rising inflation, stagnant wages kept below the rate of inflation, as well as job insecurity caused by zero hours contracts and the gig economy and the detrimental effects of Brexit. But Reform and the Conservatives can’t admit that, as they believe that this has all been a splendid success and will make us all wealthier and business more secure and prosperous in the long run.
Behind this, I suspect, is the need to get British workers to take the jobs that were originally filled by immigrants and migrant workers now that immigration has become such a hot topic and the Tories are announcing their intention to cut it. It’s basically a return to the calls for Brits to work a fruit pickers instead of migrant workers a few years. That was met by complaints from people who had tried, but were turned down as the farmers preferred to employ migrants.
As for retraining the unemployed to fill certain jobs, there are obvious problems with this. Not everyone has the strength or temperament, let alone the academic qualifications for certain jobs. Army officers are an example of this. Membership of the armed forces demands physical and mental toughness as well as the ability to kill while observing the laws of war. In the case of the officer corps, it also demands intelligence, the jokes about military intelligence being a contradiction in terms aside. Those are very exacting standards and not everyone is able to fill them. There are other problems matching people to jobs. I was given grief when I tried signing on after gaining my archaeology Ph.D. nearly ten years ago by the clerks at the Job Centre. They were annoyed that I spent my time looking for jobs as an archaeologist, particularly in academia. I was told at my last meeting with them, where the supervising girl basically told me not to bother signing on any more, that I should really have been looking for menial jobs like cleaning before trying to find the work I was qualified to do. It shows the way the Job Centre staff aren’t interesting in making sure the right people find the right jobs but simply getting people off their books. But the problem with this is that employers of such jobs probably aren’t interested in taking on graduates, who are obviously overqualified. And some of the jobs that need to be filled require years of training and experience. Our favourite internet non-historian the other day put up a piece asking why this country needed to import architects and archaeologists from overseas. With archaeologists I think he may have a point, as I think there may be surplus of qualified archaeologists compared to the number of jobs. The profession was expanding a decade ago, but that seems to have passed and the number of archaeology firms set up in the boom time may have shrunk. I don’t know about architects. Assuming that there is a shortage of British architects – and I’m not sure there is – the problem here is that it takes years of study and training to qualify as one. It’s not a profession where someone can be retrained and fit to work in a few weeks.
The demands for people on sickness benefit to be retrained to fill these job vacancies then is just more right-wing Tory ideology about benefit scroungers and malingerers, which ignores the real reasons behind their sickness and the problem the unemployed face finding jobs they can actually do. But as the government and business faces increased difficulty recruiting foreign workers because of Brexit and the controversy over immigration, we can expect these demands to get worse.
I’ve just found this piece from the I by Chloe Chaplain reporting that Momentum have warned Starmer that he could lose votes from purging his party’s left and pointing to their own electoral successes to show that Labour can still win with left-wing policies. He’s also been warned that he cannot rely on the Tories’ implosion to secure a Labour victory.
‘Purging the left and ditching socialism could see Labour lose voters, Sir Keir Starmer warned
Sir Keir Starmer has been warned he risks alienating core Labour voters who could stay home and not vote if he turns his back on socialism ahead of the general election.
The left of his party are pointing their own local election successes as evidence that a radical agenda can be attractive to voters. And others are warning Sir Keir of the danger of losing out to apathy.
The Labour leader has made a considerable shift to the centre since taking charge, with appeals to former Tory voters who could be tempted to swing to his party. In doing so, he has pulled power away from the vocal left-wing of his party that had dominated under his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn.
As the general election draws closer, and with Labour’s final policy agenda being drawn up, left wing campaigners and MPs are pushing to stop the leadership turning its back entirely on pledges they argue are very popular among voters.
It cites the Labour administration in Worthing, West Sussex – where Momentum co-chair Hilary Schan was elected as a councillor – and successes in Broxtow, Nottinghamshire, and Preston, Lancashire as examples of a socialist policy platform winning votes. They argue that, if he continues on his current path of “purging” left-wing candidates and policies he could lose support in areas like these.
Ms Schan said the three authorities were a “a living, breathing demonstration that there is no trade-off between electability and transformative policies”.
“As a general election closes in, the Labour leadership has a chance to lay out a bold programme to fix the Tories’ broken Britain. Choosing to instead pursue yet more purges and division will only weaken our electoral coalition and damage prospects of a Labour majority,” she said.’
I’m glad this is being pointed out to Starmer and that it’s got what appears to be a neutral report in the I. As opposed to the right-wing press, which will probably report this with headlines screaming that it’s another attempt by Corbynite anti-Semitic Trots to keep their hold on Labour. But I have absolutely no doubt that Starmer won’t listen, and will carry on purging the left.
As for New Labour’s right-wing policies appealing to Tory voters, this needs to be qualified. The public ownership campaign group We Own It has cited statistics again and again showing that the British public, including a majority of Tory voters, want the utilities taken back into public ownership. What is stopping this isn’t public opinion but Thatcherite ideology and the media and political establishment, which will seek to demonise and undermine any politician that seeks to press for such policies.
I got this message from the pro-democracy organisation giving their assessment of Labour’s proposed policies as revealed on the Labour list website. They welcome many of them, but criticise Labour for not including proportional representation, repealing the harsh anti-protest laws or defending the political independence of the electoral commission.
‘Dear David,
Yesterday, the LabourList website published a summary of Labour’s draft policy platform – likely to be the foundation of Labour’s 2024 manifesto. There’s a lot in there that we at Open Britain can get excited about, but also some concerning omissions which we simply can’t ignore.
Let’s start with the positive. We’re finally seeing some fleshed-out policy on key issues, and from what we can see, it does look like Labour is taking public concerns around the environment, economy and security seriously. Of particular interest to us, though, is the section at the bottom entitled “Reform Westminster and Devolve Power.” Here are some of the plans featured there:
Reducing the voting age to 16
Greater devolution of power to the nations
Creation of the Integrity and Ethics Commission, which looks into breaches of ministerial code and misconduct
Banning second jobs for MPs
Replacing the House of Lords with an elected chamber
Cracking down on political donations from shell companies
This is all really good, sensible stuff. It shows a distinctive move away from the current government’s anti-democratic legislative agenda and a commitment to restoring public trust in politics, getting younger people involved, and putting the Boris Johnson days long behind us.
But there is an elephant in the room that we need to talk about. Proportional representation is a potentially disastrous omission. PR is supported en masse by Labour stakeholders across the board because it would fundamentally change Westminster’s toxic, win-at-all-costs dynamic. It would also make more people’s votes count, restoring their confidence in the system. Starmer can’t just wish the calls for PR away.
And there are some other elephants in the room too. What about revisiting this government’s sly voter identification policy? What about repealing the Policing and Public Order Acts so that dissenters aren’t arbitrarily thrown into cells? What about reinstating the independence of the Electoral Commission? As much as we applaud this positive constitutional agenda, there’s a lot of damage being done right now that it won’t undo.
Imagine this policy package with those additions. That would be the kind of landmark reform that would boost this country’s mood almost overnight, unleashing the democratic power of so many who have gone without a voice for so long.
We don’t want just to imagine it. We want to make it real. We want to make our voices so loud that the Labour leadership has to listen. This agenda shows that they understand the issues we face – but they’re not yet willing to do everything it takes to address them. Let’s keep the pressure on.
I got this email early this morning from the pro-democracy group Open Britain. They see the mass arrests of the anti-monarchy protesters at the coronation as showing that the right to protest in Britain is dead. They are also unimpressed with Wes Streeting’s pronouncements on the matter, as he failed to say whether Labour would repeal the legislation or change the approach to policing such protests. Starmer’s own comments on the matter are highly ambiguous. He states that he won’t repeal the legislation as it needs to ‘bed in’, and just because the cops have the power to do something, it doesn’t mean that they will on every occasion. There are other views and vloggers, which claim that Streeting has supported the anti-monarchy protesters’ right to demonstrate and that the legislation needs to be amended rather than repealed. But nevertheless, it strongly gives the impression that Starmer and the Labour right are deeply authoritarian who don’t support this key democratic right.
‘Dear David,
Whether this coronation weekend was one of celebration, quiet acceptance, or frustration for you, we can all agree on one thing – the right to protest is dead.
On Saturday, the met police hauled away peaceful republican protestors. They wrapped up their placards and signs and loaded them into the back of trucks. All told, 62 arrests were made, with charges including “conspiracy to cause a public nuisance” and possession of a bike lock (which could, in the Met’s eyes, be used to “lock on” to objects in protest).
In a free society, the state tolerates dissent. Even if the monarchy is a symbol of pride for many of those in Westminster, they can’t just have anyone who disagrees thrown in a police van.
This is the logical outcome of this government’s slide into authoritarianism, with policies like the Policing Act and Public Order Act granting officers sweeping powers over anyone creating a bit of noise or voicing a difference of opinion. So much for the “freedom of expression” that they’ve been ranting about – that only applies to discrimination or racist dolls, apparently.
The scary part of this story is that the entire power centre of British politics is already accepting this state of affairs as normal. Labour’s Wes Streeting declined to confirm that his party would repeal either of those illiberal bills or change the approach to protests in any significant way if in government. Keir Starmer’s comments today echoed Labour’s refusal to stand up for basic human rights.
In a 2021 poll, 63% of Britons said that “people should have the right to attend a protest to stand up for what they believe in” – and only 9% disagreed. How is it, then, that BOTH of the two major parties are now firmly against peaceful protest? In an odd twist, the Lib Dems, Greens and SNP – the UK’s smallest parties – are the only ones committing to reinstate the right to protest.
This proves beyond a doubt that what we need is a united movement to reclaim our rights and make Britain a real democracy again. We’re building that movement as we speak, bringing together everyone who will speak out against Westminster’s broken system. It’s deeper than partisan politics – it’s about pulling us out of the mess the country as a whole has fallen into.
As a small team, we need all the help we can get to make it happen. We’re working tirelessly with our allies in civil society, Parliament and the general public to shake this country out of its authoritarian stupor. We greatly appreciate whatever you can do to help us revive the right to protest.
I haven’t donated to the organisation, but am posting this message here as I believe it is an important comment on the current lack of proper democracy under this highly illiberal Tory legislation.
I’ve been looking through Roy Palmer’s A Ballad History of England for anything suitable to put up for the coronation. I thought of something written for the restoration, but the only piece I could find like that is this ballad by Henry Jones of Oxford, published in 1660. It celebrates Charles II hiding from Cromwell and his troopers in the oak at Boscobel, which then became commemorated every year afterwards as Oak Apple Day. Palmer gives a description how it was celebrated in one school in Leicestershire, which is rather alarming: the children went around with stinging nettles wrapped in dock leaves looking to inflict a few stings on people who were insufficiently royalist. Given the debacle yesterday, when the Met police was arresting anti-monarchy protesters simply for the terrible crime of protesting, I think some of those cops have the same mentality. The ballad goes on to describe how Charles pretended to be the servant of the serving maid helping him to escape, and there’s several touches of humour as the disguised Charles comes a cropper in front of Roundhead troopers, who all have a good laugh. He finds sanctuary at the Three Crowns in Bristol, where he’s told to wind up the jack, but overwinds it instead. The ballad finally ends with Charles catching a ship to safety in France.
I recite the ballad’s lyrics and also play the tune as reproduced in the book. I don’t, however, do the two together because words and music are printed separately and I haven’t worked out how to fit the one to the other. Sorry.
I hope people enjoy it, whatever their views on the monarchy.
This is a very short video from the PoliticsJoe site on YouTube of the leader of the SNP in Westminster having a very sharp dig at Keir Starmer for his betrayal of the country’s students. Flynn says that David Cameron convinced his coalition partner, Nick Clegg, to drop his pledge to end tuition fees. Flynn therefore has to congratulate Rishi Sunak on similarly convincing Starmer to drop his commitment to ending tuition fees. Of course, the Tories are highly delighted. Sunak grins like a maniac and looks around him to the Tory benches, who are also enjoying the joke immensely. Starmer just sits there with an expression half-grimace, half-stupid grin. Sunak then take to the despatch box to state that more people have gone to university under the Tories than ever before. Flynn responds by taking the floor again to say that the Conservatives don’t believe in ending tuition fees, the Liberal Democrats don’t believe in ending tuition fees, and now Labour doesn’t believe in ending tuition fees. He therefore appeals to the Speaker, ‘isn’t it true that all of them mainstream parties have failed Britain’s young people?’ Sunak responds by stating that more underprivileged young people are going to university in England than in Scotland.
I don’t like the way Flynn handed Sunak an opportunity to make the Tories look good, but his gibe at Starmer is right on target and deserved. As for more people going to university under the Tories than ever before, that’s probably true but it’s the continuation of a trend that began under Blair. It also doesn’t answer the real point underneath Flynn’s statement, which is that students are being burdened with mountainous debt. As for more underprivileged young people going to university in England rather than Scotland, that’s because the population of England is far greater than Scotland and there are more universities. Sunak is not helping students, as they’re faced not only with student debt, but also with the costs of living away from home during the cost of living crisis.
But Starmer isn’t going to help students either, although he still seems to want people to believe that he might with his wibbling that the current system is wrong and Labour will look at alternative ways of paying tuition fees. Well, some of us can remember Thatcher’s big plan in the 1980s to get businesses to sponsor students at university, even if they weren’t studying a subject related to the sponsor. That idea didn’t last long, despite all the fanfare. I don’t think any similar alternative to state payment of tuition fees Starmer might dream will last long either. The Guardian was similarly sceptical about Starmer’s ambiguous statement. They compared it to Schrodinger’s Cat, a metaphor for the behaviour of sub-atomic particles in quantum physics. In the metaphor, a cat is locked in a box with an instrument measuring atomic decay and a flask of poison. The atomic device randomly decides whether or not to smash the flask and release the poison, killing the cat. How can you tell if the moggy’s alive or dead? You can’t unless you open the box and make an observation. Until that time, the cat is both alive and dead, in the same manner that, in quantum physics, particles can be in two contradictory states until the scientist makes an observation. Starmer’s position on tuition fees is like the cat: it both is and isn’t in favour of dropping tuition fees.
But quantum physics, while it holds sway in the sub-atomic world, doesn’t work in the macro world which is subject to Einsteinian relativity. Similarly, Starmer’s position on tuition fees comes down to him deciding against ending them and betraying students. He wants us to believe otherwise, but that’s what it amounts to.
His repeated betrayals and breaking of pledges and promises have made him a laughing stock. As a leader, he’s a treacherous liability. And unfortunately we can’t blame this on Tory influence.
I’ll admit I do enjoy looking at some of the videos on YouTube of art created by various AI programmes. Mostly there of the type ‘what if Star Wars, or another popular film or TV series was in the style of H.R. Giger or some other artist?’ It is fascinating to see what these machines produce. But I am also uncomfortable with the implications. The programmes produce fascinating, complex works of art without human agency, although they are based on the works of existing artists. Some have accused them of plagiarism, and there’s also the threat of unemployment to real, working human artists. I am also disquieted by the implications that artistic creativity may not be limited to humanity but can be produced by machines.
A few days ago, New Scientist announced that a film had been produced using these art programmes. It was about an AI trying to help the last survivor of humanity. I can remember that films of this sort were predicted nearly four decades ago in a late night TV series about the possibilities of computing presented or starring Jonathan Powell. One of its predictions was films produced without human actors. I don’t know if this new film has no real actors in it, or whether it still needs humans to produce the characters’ voices. But with the rise of deep fake movies, where it is nearly impossible to tell a computer-generated image from reality, it does seem to me that we are very near that particularly prediction about future movies. The Science Fiction film The Congress also suggested the same possibility a few years ago. This was a loose adaptation of Stanislaw Lem’s The Futurological Congress, about an academic who finds himself transported into a decaying future, whose reality is disguised from the population by hallucinogenic drugs. The film, however, changes it so that the decaying society is a product of the mass use of a drug that produces a consensual hallucinatory world. The heroine is a real Hollywood actress, playing a version of herself, who signs away her image so that a series of movies are made starring her by computers, but which she isn’t actually in herself. The deep fakes are a sign that the technology is there to make this a possibility as well.
So while the film interests me, I am worried about what it implies for human art and the film industry, and whether they will be a casualty of the rise of such technology.
Hooray for Marina Purkiss! She was on GB News last night talking Jacob Rees-Mogg, or Jacob Reet Snob as one of the great commenters here called him, and told him straight that the Tories were using the culture war as a distraction from their disastrous failures. She was talking about the way the Conservatives, and also their media collaborators, were using issues like the Channel migrants and the renaming of streets to get people angry and take their attention away from issues like the long waiting times for an ambulance. She pointed out that 30p Lee Anderson had said the Tories should concentrate on the culture war, as they had nothing else with which to fight Labour. And she pointed out that GB News’ stories were all about the culture war, with little, if anything, said about the economy. Snob tried to come back with a point about free speech being important and threatened by wokeness, but she continued to press her point. Here’s Maximilien Robespierre’s video on it.
I differ a bit from Purkiss in that I don’t think the issues in the culture war are entirely trivial. The trans controversy is important because it does have a real impact on women’s safety and privacy, and also the bodies and minds of vulnerable young people and especially gays. However, these issues aren’t as important and don’t affect as many people as the way the health service is being run down ready for further privatisation, the tanking of the British economy, the rising levels of ‘food poverty’ in Britain, and the way Brexit is wrecking British industry and agriculture. I’m very conscious of the way the trans controversy is being weaponised against the left, because Starmer has made supporting a gender recognition act a plank of his electoral policy. As a result, there have been calls for gender critical people on the left to hold their noses and vote Tory over this issue.
I still intend to criticise the gender ideology, but I have no intention of doing so to the extent that it will help the Tories win back another.
Hundreds of civilians have been killed on the streets of the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, as rival military factions fight for control. [1] As the violence escalates, hundreds of people have been evacuated by the UK to safety but many more still remain. [2]
This includes at least 74 NHS doctors who are being turned away from evacuation flights, despite having a UK Visa, because only UK passport holders are being let on board. [3] NHS doctors are being told to “make their own way” to the UK. [4] And there are many more people in Sudan who currently live and work in the UK that are also being denied.
This treatment is leaving these doctors feeling “betrayed” by the country they have given so much to – especially during the pandemic. [5] And with things moving so fast on the ground in Sudan right now – we have to act NOW to get these people to safety.
So David, if you think those with UK Visas who live and work in this country should be evacuated from Sudan, can you sign the petition today? For every 1000 signatures, we’ll send an email to the Foreign Office letting them know how many people are demanding they do the right thing. It will only take a few seconds:
I’ve signed the petition, because I think it is absolutely disgraceful that valued and needed NHS doctors, who have valid visas but not passports, should be abandoned to fend for themselves in the fighting. If you feel the same way I do, please sign it as well.
Beastrabban\'s Weblog 