>New Worker Online Digest > >Week commencing 3rd March, 2000. > >1) Editorial - Help is needed now! & Who gains, who pays? > >2) Lead story - Brown's new attack on the unemployed. > >3) Feature article - Thousands of teachers plan to quit. > >4) International story - Lebanese resistance strikes new blows. > >5) British news item - GM conference stacked against environmentalists. > > >1) Editorial > >Help is needed now! > > THE catastrophic flooding in Mozambique is of such a scale that >international help is needed immediately. The British government is no >doubt right to be seeking out and underwriting the cost of helicopters and >aircraft that are already in the region of south east Africa. But this does >not provide Britain with an excuse for shilly-shallying about over the >sending of British helicopters, other air transport and vital aid. > > It is utterly ludicrous for ministers to argue that Mozambique is so far >away that it would take too long for supplies to come directly from Britain. > > It isn't true -- Hercules aircraft loaded with aid could be in Maputo >within hours and even helicopters could be brought in by Antonov planes, >naval carriers and British military facilities abroad. > > Government minister Clare Short told the House of Commons last week that >money wasn't the main issue -- the difficulties she described were largely >logistical. But there clearly is an issue of money since this disaster has >destroyed everything -- crops, animals, homes, railways, bridges, roads, >power supplies, water supplies -- over a vast swathe of a country that was >poor to begin with. > > Countless thousands of people are now homeless and in urgent need of food, >clean water, medical supplies and shelter. The restoration of the ruined >infrastructure will take time and money and the flooded farmland will be >out of production for the forseeable future. Without international aid >there will be a tragedy of enormous proportions. > > The rich western states have directly or indirectly lived off the back of >Africa for centuries. The poverty of countries like Mozambique is the >legacy of past European colonialism, of Imperialist-led neo-colonialism, of >economic pressure from big international banking interests and covert >interference that fuelled civil war. That western aid should be sent now is >beyond question. > > There should be no grumbling in the House of Commons over aid for >Mozambique, whether that is in the immediate crisis of rescuing survivors >from the rising waters or as the longer-term problems come to the fore. >After all this government apparently thought nothing at all of spending >millions upon millions for months on end m order to bomb Yugoslavia, and >that enormous waste was not debated by the House at all! > > ************************** >Who gains, who pays? > > WHENEVER the imperialist powers turn to warfare, bombing and the >slow-death tactic of sanctions, there is always the expectation of money >and profit in the minds of the powerful capitalist interests that lie >behind it all. > > While the leaders of the imperialist camp tell their own people that the >cause of their current war is just, humanitarian, and in the interests of >future peace, it is in reality nothing but a sordid attempt to penetrate >other countries' economies, control world markets >and prices, weaken states that don't behave like puppets ot Imperialism and >to provide investment opportunities for the rich. > > Most of the people in the imperialist heartlands have nothing to gain from >any of this. We Just get to pay the bill for the war. And when the >immediate fighting ends the cost of restoration is left for the victims to >find. > > In the Balkans the long years of western-imposed conflict has created many >refugees -- people the Nato powers shamefully exploited in their propaganda >campaign to start the bombing of Yugoslavia. > > Now they have served their purpose the western governments want to wash >then hands of the displaced Kosovans, Bosnians, Serbs and others, including >the very people the Nato propagandists wrung their hands over Just a year ago. > > When refugees, whether from Yugoslavia or the affected neighbouring >countries, arnve in Britain as asylum seekers the capitalist ruling class >gives nothing. The cost is put on local authorities for working >people to meet.'The most backward elements even exploit the situation to >whistle up a storm of xenophobia and racism among the local people who are >encouraged to blame the refugees for their own misfortunes. > > The government went to war. The government bombed thousands of people's >homes and brought catastrophe to the Balkans the government should >therefore treat asylum seekers decently and should pay the full costs. > > ************************** > >2) Lead story > >Brown's new attack on the unemployed. > >by Daphne Liddle > >CHANCELLOR Gordon Brown last week launched a new Government attack on the >unemployed -- along much the same lines as the former Tory government. > > He claims the official figures for unemployment, around 1.1 million, are >roughly equal to the number of job vacancies in Britain, just over one >million. > > During a visit to an unemployment blackspot in east London last week, he >said that almost all the unemployed could get jobs if they really made an >effort. > > And to help them he is launching a new initiative -- hit squads to descend >on unemployment blackspots and to harry the unemployed into taking any work >whatever. > > The Govemment will even help out by lending the unemployed free mobile >phones (funded by industry) so their personal advisers from the job centres >can ring them up within minutes if a vacancy comes up. > > There will also be some funding so the jobless can travel about seeking >work and small grants so they can subsist between the cutting off of their >benefits and the arrival of the first wage packet. > > This sounds so much like Thatcher-style monetarism that Michael Portillo, >in the House of Commons, was accusing Gordon Brown of rank hypocrisy in >having campaigned against Thatcher's policies. > > The policies of course just do not add up and will help very few. > > For a start, although official figures put the number of unemployed at 1.1 >million, this figure is produced using the Tory method of calculating the >number of unemployed which Brown himself once exposed as extremely misleading. > > The International Labour Organisation method of calculating puts the real >figure at around 1.7 million. > > Many of the job vacancies are in London and the south east. They are also >for very low quality, low paid jobs. > > Former miners and steelworkers from Wales, Scotland and the north of >England cannot just upsticks, get on their Tebbit bikes, and head for the >capital to seek jobs flipping burgers for tourists, because they would have >nowhere to live. > > House prices and rents in the south east are rising astronomically and the >average private sector rent is now well above the average burger-bar wage. > > Most burger-bar workers are students still living in their parents' homes >or they could not afford to remain in the capital. With their student loan >and low wage and parental help they can just about scrape by. > > The queues for housing association homes or council housing are very, very >long. > > Many unemployment black spots are in old pit villages or degenerated >industrial areas. Public transport in these places is abysmal. > > If work is to be had beyond walking or cycling distance, it is only for >those with cars because there is no other way of getting there. And people >who have been unemployed for any length of time cannot afford to run cars. > > Mr Brown's transport grants may get someone to an interview, but they are >not enough to cover the cost of a car for daily travel. > > Most Job Centre staff, already severely overworked, are probably wondering >how they're going to find time to do all this extra personal advising and >harrying. > > The free mobile phones may give someone the edge in getting a new job >within minutes of it being advertised. But if one unemployed person gets >that job, another does not. The total number on the unemployed register >stays the same. > > This is the problem with all the job schemes of both Labour and Tory >governments. Not one of them creates one single job. > > And capitalism being capitalism, no government can guarantee jobs. > > Gordon Brown may think he has solved the riddle of the universe as far as >the economy is concerned but the Confederation of British Industry last >week came to the very Marxist conclusion that the cycle of boom and bust is >not a thing of the past. > > The CBI warns that the high level of sterling is leading to a yawning >trade gap -- last year it stood at £15.5 billion, a ten-year high. This is >costing jobs in Britain. > > There may be lots of low quality, fast food bar jobs on the market but >every week brings more news of good quality, high paid jobs going down the >drain. Last month the Anglo-Dutch giant company Unilever announced >cut-backs of around 25,000 staff at its plants around the globe -- around >ten per cent of its total workforce. In Britain the company employs 16,500 >people at 27 locations. > > This came just two days after the Norwich Union and CGU announced a merger >that will cut 4,000 jobs in the insurance sector. > > Banks have been announcing thousands of job cuts last month in spite of >Government handouts of up to £70 million under a scheme to bring work to >deprived areas. The Pearl and NPI insurance group is to cut 10 per centof >its workforce. > > And the defence giant British Aerospace also announced up to 2,500 job >cuts, mainly at management level, in Scotland. > > Brown's new initiative is not to help people find jobs but to coerce >people into taking the very worst jobs or face losing their benefits. > > This in turn will lower the general level of wages and undermine working >class living standards. It is the same old class war of the bosses >attacking the workers, using their friend Mr Brown to spearhead the attack. > > ********************* > > >3) Feature article > >Thousands of teachers plan to quit. > >by Caroline Colebrook > >MORE THAN 200,000 teachers are planning to leave the profession within the >next ten years, according to an opinion poll conducted by the Guardian >newspaper and published last week. > > This number represents around half the total number of teachers in England >and puts a huge question mark over all Government plans concerning education. > > Many of the teachers are approaching retirement anyway -- some 40 per cent >of the profession are aged over 40. But they are not being replaced by >younger recruits and many who are younger are also planning to quit for >another career. > > They blame the heavy workload, stress and bureaucracy that now goes with >teaching. > > The survey conducted by ICM found a very high level of disaffection among >younger teachers with more than a third of those under 35 planning to leave >within ten years and 46 per cent within 15 years. > > The survey said the worst problems are in primary schools which have >endured the biggest changes since Labour came to power in 1997. > > Nearly a third of primary teachers are expecting to quit within five years >and more than half within ten years. > > Secondary schools are not much better with more than a quarter of teachers >expecting to quit within five years and half within ten years. > > Education and Employment Secretary David Blunkett can expect the problem >to worsen with the introduction of performance related pay, which will put >teachers in competition with each other and greatly increase stress in the >profession. > > Teaching unions warned that education faces disaster unless the Government >addresses the needs of teachers. > > Doug McAvoy, the general secretary of the National Union ofTeachers, >warned the Government to take notice of the poll and said: "For the >children's sake, we hope teachers won't leave the profession. But it is a >measure of how far the Government has ignored teachers' concerns that so >many wish to do so." > > And Nigel de Gruchy, the general secretary of the National Association of >School Masters and Union of Women Teachers, said: "More and more teachers >will quit unless the Government acts to reduce the workload with a contract >protecting staff from unlimited hours and ever-increasing demands." > > The general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, Peter >Smith, said: "Ministers have a potential crisis on their hands. Their >challenge is to find a way of motivating the generation of teachers needed >to replace those who can't wait to retire." > > Meanwhile in Wales, teaching unions are uniting to put pressure on the >National Assembly to show courage over the issue of teachers'pay. > > The NUT, NASUWT, the National Association of Head Teachers, the Secondary >Heads Association, the ATL, and the Welsh teaching union, Ucac, staged a >joint press conference to urge the National Assembly to show its teeth when >it comes to the issue of pay and conditions. > > Performance related pay is due to be introduced next September. Some >teachers will be eligible for an extra £2,000 a year if they pass a >threshold of criteria, including the examination results of pupils. > > A handful could earn over £30,000 under the terms and conditions which >have been set by Whitehall. > > The teaching unions in Wales are calling on the National Assembly to set >different terms and conditions for the assessment of performance pay. > > Secretary of NUT Cymru, Gethin Lewis said: "This is a chance for Rhodri >Morgan's administration to show they have political backbone and are not >willing to just toe the line of Millbank and Westminster and I speak for >all of us when I say that." > > ************************* > >4) International story > >Lebanese resistance strikes new blows. > >by Our Middle East Affairs correspondent > >LEBANESE National Resistance fighters wiped out an Israeli army auxiliary >patrol on Wednesday killing five members of the puppet "South Lebanon Army" >(SLA) in the so-called "security belt" some 15 km north of the >Israeli-Lebanon frontier. > > The "SLA" jeep was rocked by a powerful roadside bomb planted in the road. >The guerrillas then raked the jeep with machine-gun fire to finish them >off. In Beirut, the Hezbullah (Party of God) resistance movement said its >fighters had carried out the mission. > > Things are not looking to good for Israeli premier Ehud Barak. When his >Labour party won the elections last year he told the Israeli public that he >would pull the troops out of Lebanon with or without an agreement by July >2000. He also said he would put talks with the Palestinians and the Syrians >back on the fast track to end the Middle East conflict once and for all. > > Barak has only himself and his own cabinet to blame. While the >Palestinians and Syrians were ready to give the new Israeli government the >benefit of the doubt Barak's negotiators have stubbornly refused to even >meet the Arabs half-way in the talks. > > Palestinian President Yasser Arafat is angry at Israel's nitpicking >third-stage withdrawal from the West Bank -- which has still to be fully >implemented. The Syrians are sticking to the principle of a total >withdrawal for a total peace -- which means an Israeli evacuation from >every inch of the occupied Golan Heights. > > Barak no doubt hoped that the Arabs would kow-tow to the old Labour policy >of half a carrot and plenty of stick. But the carrot -- partial withdrawal >leaving Israel with the pick of the West Bank and Jerusalem plus parts of >the Golan -- is unacceptable. And the Arabs have Lived under the Israeli >stick for decades -- a few more months or years makes no difference now. > > Israel has tried pounding Lebanon to no avail. But the mounting death toll >is firing demands from the Israeli peace movement for Barak to keep his >promise and just get out. > > This year Israel admits to the loss of seven soldiers and 19 wounded in >the fighting along with 12 "SLA" auxiliaries dead and another 12 injured in >resistance actions. They managed to kill just five Lebanese partisans and >the guerrillas, backed by the Lebanese people and supported by Syria and >Iran, have long proved that they can keep up the fight. > > Reports that Tel Aviv has put out tenders for the dismantling of army >installations in the "security zone" coupled with Israeli press reports >that Israel plans to dump the "SLA" militia in Turkish-occupied Cyprus >after a withdrawal suggest that the countdown has begun. > > Ehud Barak started his term of office talking about a "peace of the >brave". Unfortunately his government has not shown the vision or realism >yet to achieve > > Now, with the Palestinian talks stalled and the Syrian track going nowhere >all he can definitely guarantee is a unilateral pull-out from south Lebanon >-- one which looks increasingly likely to take place to the echo of the >guns of the Lebanese resistance. > > ********************* > >5) British news item > >GM conference stacked against environmentalists. > > THE FEARS of environmentalists that their concerns would be side-lined at >a major international conference on genetically modified food proved well >founded. > > The conference in Edinburgh last week was organised by the Organisation >for Economic Cooperation and Development. > > Cabinet Minister Dr Mo Mowlam was quick to deny that Prime Minister Tony >Blair's admission that GM foods might have a potential for harm marked a >Government U-turn on the issue. > > Most of the speakers were scientists working on GM foods, many within huge >corporations with vested interests. > > Environmentalists like Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the Soil >Association were relegated to discussion panels. > > The agenda was firmly focused on direct risks to human health while the >environmentalists wanted also to discuss the wider implications to the >environment -- the possibility that untameable mutant weeds will be created >or that creatures like the Monarch butterfly will become extinct. > > Even on the question of risks to human health, there is so far little >evidence one way or an other and what there is, is contradictory. > > Dr Arpad Pusztai conducted a study of rats fed on GM potatoes which >showed damage to their internal organs. But this has been refuted by other >scientists who have done the same test. > > The United States government came under heavy fire on the opening day of >the conference from American lawyer Steve Druker, who accused it of a >massive cover up on the safety of GM foods and of ignoring its own >scientific advice. > > He said the Food and Drug Administration, which licences GM foods in the >US, had not only ignored its scientific advisers but "set shoddy safety >standards". > > He said the FDA had introduced a standard of proof known as "substantive >equivalence" which assumed GM foods carry the same risks as traditional ones. > > FDA scientists have expressed doubt on this policy but they have been >by-passed to allow GM foods to be licensed wholesale in the US illegally. >Thus GM food has been fed into the British market without proper safety >checks. > > The conference chairperson, Sir John Krebs called for a world body to >police the development of GM foods. But current experience suggests that >such a body would probably fall under the control of the major imperialist >powers and add to their powers to exploit and control Third World countries. > > ********************* > > >New Communist Party of Britain Homepage > >http://www.newcommunistparty.org.uk > >A news service for the Working Class! > >Workers of all countries Unite! __________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki - Finland +358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081 e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kominf.pp.fi ___________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe/unsubscribe messages mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________
