The current crisis within the Parliamentary Labour Party is deeply regrettable and unnecessary. Last week’s vote to leave the European Union presents the entire labour movement with unprecedented challenges. Above all, we need to be fighting to preserve our members’ jobs, already under threat in several industries and across the public sector as a consequence. The government is in crisis, but already serious debates are taking place and decisions being made which profoundly affect the interests of working people.
Under these circumstances, our members and millions of others will be looking with dismay at the events in parliament. It cannot be right to seek to denude the Labour front bench at this time, when the government more than ever needs to be scrutinised and held to account by an effective and united opposition that does the job it is paid to do
Jeremy Corbyn is the democratically-elected Leader of our Party who secured such a resounding mandate less than ten months ago under an electoral procedure fully supported by Labour MPs. His position cannot and should not be challenged except through the proper democratic procedures provided for in the Party’s constitution. We urge all Labour MPs to abide by those procedures, and to respect the authority of the Party’s Leader.
While we have stated that we believe a Leadership election would be an unwelcome distraction at this time of crisis, if one nevertheless occurs through the proper procedures we would expect all parts of the Party to honour the result and pull together in the interests of the country, and working people in particular. The only party that can win for working people is a strong and united Labour Party.
Len McCluskey, General Secretary, Unite the Union
Dave Prentis, General Secretary, UNISON
Tim Roache, General Secretary, GMB
Dave Ward, General Secretary, CWU
Brian Rye, Acting General Secretary, UCATT
Manuel Cortes, General Secretary, TSSA
Mick Whelan, General Secretary, ASLEF
Matt Wrack, General Secretary, FBU
Ronnie Draper, General Secretary, BFAWU
Chris Kitchen, General Secretary, NUM
Members and representatives of the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union condemn the actions of a number of Labour MPs, who have chosen to start a civil war within their own party. Since Jeremy Corbyn’s landslide election victory nine months ago, certain MPs unable to accept democracy, have sought to de-stabilise the party and undermine Mr Corbyn’s vision time and again, often through Conservative Party supporting outlets, including the Rupert Murdoch media empire.
In the space of nine months, Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party has increased its membership massively, gaining support from all sections of society, including students, the elderly, the disabled and previously disillusioned Trade Unions. His effective opposition has forced the government into U-turn, after U-turn on issues directly affecting ordinary people and he has performed solidly in local elections, winning important by-elections and mayoral elections, often increasing Labour’s vote share. It’s also worth mentioning, that Mr Corbyn is the first ever political leader to have a majority of females on the front benches. This is despite having inherited a broken and de-moralised party after the damaging 2015 General Election. The truth is that as leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn has achieved more in nine months than his predecessor managed in five years.
The justification the rebel MPs are using for this attempted coup, is Mr Corbyn’s performance during the referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union. This is disingenuous to say the least. 63% of Labour Party supporters voted to remain in the EU, with 75% of Mr Corbyn’s own constituency voting to remain. If Labour wished to scapegoat anyone, surely it would have been members of the party’s pro-EU campaign management team, which included the likes of Alan Johnson and ironically, Hilary Benn. The reality, is that this cabal of mainly Blairite MPs have been planning this for a long time and given the timing, it begs the questions; how much of this is about the imminent arrival of the Chilcot report and who may, or may not come out of it badly? How much of this is to provide distraction? Is it just a coincidence that many of the people who are calling for votes of no confidence in Mr Corbyn are notorious supporters of Tony Blair, who voted for the illegal war in Iraq? It certainly seems bizarre, that given the fact that the Conservatives are going into meltdown and the country is crying out for unity, that these people should decide that now is the time for a civil war within the Labour Party.
The crisis currently engulfing the country is one that originated within the Conservative Party. David Cameron gambled with the welfare of the country during the 2015 General Election by making the promise of an EU referendum a key part of his election manifesto, in order to prevent losing votes to UKIP, placate Tory back-benchers and to ultimately protect his own political position. However, rather than expose the Conservative Party and address the real issues now affecting the country, the media and the usual suspects within the establishment have decided to make Jeremy Corbyn the sacrificial lamb, for no other reason than that they see him as a threat to the status quo; in other words, a political leader who cannot be bought.
The BFAWU and its members are at a loss to understand the stupidity of these MPs. On Sunday, June 27th 2016, members and activists of our Union were gathering outside the head office building of Samworth Brothers to support Kumaran Bose; a worker sacked for exposing the injustices workers are experiencing in his factory. While we were out fighting for fair play and equality, well paid Labour MPs were acting like drones for those who created the ‘Brexit’ mess by knifing their leader in the back, crowing about it on social media and prostituting themselves to current affairs TV and radio programmes, in order to twist the knife further. This just adds insult to injury. That a number of Labour MPs seek to create division in such a treacherous manner and make it their priority, whilst our members face attacks on their terms and conditions, agency labour exploitation and zero hours contracts is beyond the pale. It makes you wonder what kind of Labour Party we’d be looking at, if the rogues’ gallery of Margaret Hodge, Hilary Benn, Ian Austin, Wes Streeting, Lucy Powell, Chris Bryant and all the other traitors of democracy somehow managed to seize power of the Labour Party.
The last two General Elections and the EU referendum showed that people in this country are fed up with Westminster and fed up of the politics of the past, including Tony Blair’s ‘New Labour’. People up and down the country are angry, hurting and are crying out for change. For the first time since 1945, there is an opportunity to rebuild our country with a leader that offers a future for all and a society that we can all be a part of. That's what Jeremy Corbyn offers and that's why we, as the BFAWU will continue to support him, his values and his vision.
Ian Hodson (BFAWU National President)
Like the majority of people up and the country, the Bakers', Food and Allied Workers Union were shocked and saddened at the murder of Jo Cox, MP for Batley and Spen, a 41 year old wife and mother, so viciously cut down only a year or so into a parliamentary career that promised great things.
As many have already pointed out, Jo Cox was a long standing campaigner and fighter for human rights and social justice who in many ways, represented what the Labour Party should be all about. She was a local lass who decided to follow the vocational path of representing people within her community. Indeed, her constituency includes a good number of BFAWU members who will be dismayed by this tragedy.
Whilst there are many among the political classes with whom we strongly disagree and oppose at times, there is never any justification for murder, or violence within our democracy. By the same token, we must ask how a human mind could have become so deluded as to think that killing someone in this fashion was somehow a right and just thing to do.
The BFAWU sends its deepest sympathies and condolences to the family and friends that Jo Cox leaves behind.
It turns out that the great Thatcher-Reagan promise about privatisation, free trade and the unrestrained market of a great share-owning democracy has been a costly experiment that has failed the many. Here in the UK, Thatcher promised a revolution where privatised utilities would mean lower bills, driven by competition. The lie that she rolled out was that as the industry wouldn’t need to be subsidised, it would mean lower taxes. This privatisation would lead to a prosperous country and a wealthy society for all. We would all get richer and better still, would get to keep more of our hard-earned cash. Of course the reality was completely different. Private companies have a legal obligation to their shareholders, not consumers so profit becomes the priority. Normally, this means cutting corners, cutting jobs and under-investing, whilst boosting the pay of the CEO.
While tax has fallen sharply for the richest, the tax take on the rest of us has largely stayed the same and privatised companies are pretty much unaccountable. Statistics show that since privatisation, gas prices have increased by 130%. The ten years before privatisation had shown prices increasing by just over 20%. The promise of lower bills was nothing more than an outright lie. If you look at the traditional five evils – want, squalor, idleness, ignorance and disease, in 21st century Britain you would now have to consider adding fuel poverty to those evils. Large swathes of people living in the UK now spend in excess of 10% of their income on keeping themselves warm. Statistics show that one in four households are defined as being in fuel poverty. Indeed, many people are faced with the daily dilemma of having to choose between keeping warm and eating, with the elderly being particularly at risk. It’s a clear and damning indictment that deregulation and privatisation has failed those who live in these Isles.
As for having more money in your pocket, the big six energy companies increased their prices by 37% between October 2010 and 2013. This rise is three times the rate of inflation for the same period, which was been around 10.2%. During that time, average earnings rose by 4.4%, so you don’t really have to be a mathematician in order to realise just how much people have been shafted by Thatcher’s privatisation of energy.
The problem is quite simple; the dynamics of today's electricity and gas markets do not create companies or business strategies in which public interest, objectives and social obligations are sufficiently prioritised. Instead, every dysfunction is passed on to consumers through their bills, which have now become the most regressive element in disposable household incomes. Today, people are starting to regard energy costs much like Thatcher's poll tax. It comes as no surprise that recent polls suggest 68% of Brits would like to see the renationalisation of energy.
In terms of the promise of lower taxes due to no longer subsidising the industry, it now requires long-term price guarantees for investment in renewables and nuclear without any comparable quid pro quo in lowering its target cost of capital. The National Grid, similarly privately owned, balances its profit maximising aims with a need to ensure security of supply. This means that the cost of every ambitious commitment to decarbonise British energy supply by 2030, is passed on to the consumer.
As part of its renewable strategy, the government has signed a long-term contract for nuclear power to be supplied at twice the current price of electricity. If there’s one thing that David Cameron’s government have excelled at, it’s been the ability to sniff out a bad deal. His lack of real concern, his greed and incompetence have led to the UK being locked into this deal for the next 35 years. We deserve better than this.
New research by Corporate Watch in collaboration with We Own It has found:
- Households across the UK could save £250 each on their electricity, gas and water bills and train fares if the services were publicly financed.
- Private electricity, gas, water and rail companies pay out £12bn a year to investors and shareholders in interest and dividends. In total, cheaper government borrowing rates could save the UK public £6.5bn: £4.2bn on energy, £2bn on water and £352m on rail.
- Years of inflation-busting price hikes by energy companies have increased the average profit per household more than ten-fold, leaving large numbers of people struggling and in millions of cases, failing to heat their homes adequately. Returning the energy sector to state ownership would provide some comfort for those people, not to mention a sense of empowerment as the tables could be turned on this culture of corporate greed that has only served to cheapen life in this country.
Britain needs a new and better deal, so the question is should we renationalise the big 6 or explore other ways?
What about the case for nationalisation?
According to Dr Robert Gross, Director of the Centre of Energy and Technology at Imperial College, London, the government could prevent any excess profits, while borrowing money to invest in the system could become cheaper. The government would be able to borrow money more cheaply than the big six, because it has a much stronger credit rating and because its monopoly status would make it more financially secure, therefore more likely to repay its debts. It would also not have to pay a large portion of its profits out to shareholders in the form of dividends.
“The newly created energy company could plan the system more effectively and potentially take strategic decisions for the good of the country,” Dr Gross says – a point that couldn’t be made for the four members of the big six that are foreign-owned. A focus on what was good for the country, rather than the big six’s profits and shareholders would make it easier to drive through policy goals such as ‘greening’ Britain’s electricity supply, and could bring bills down, added Dr Gross, who nonetheless describes himself as being agnostic about energy nationalisation overall, despite its potential benefits.
There is a strong argument that taking energy back into public ownership and control is vital to ensure businesses can be supplied affordable energy and thousands of customers do not die from the effects of fuel poverty. However, questions would be asked about the cost of renationalising the big 6. Maybe we need to consider that new power stations be publicly owned, whilst we encourage individuals or communities to set up smaller privately-owned generators, a process that would see energy generation largely returned to state ownership gradually over a period of two decades or so, as the main existing power stations reached the end of their lives.
I’m driven to the opinion that our main thrust should be to develop de-centralised energy that is community owned - so that effectively we make the big six redundant by building up a new ecology of community, locally and regionally owned energy, funded by strategic public investment. This is a slightly more radical version of the German model, which has seen a huge transfer from big corporate energy to local and community generation and ownership. Germans can switch power providers. In fact, they are not only free as power consumers, but also free to become “prosumers” – simultaneously producers and consumers. They can even sell the power they make at a profit. Germany’s Renewable Energy Act stipulates that the little guy’s power has priority over corporations. German feed-in tariffs have helped produce all of this community ownership, thereby simultaneously reducing ‘NIMBYism’ and increasing acceptance levels for renewables.
In most countries, the energy sector has long been in the hands of large corporations because electricity came from large central power stations. Renewables offer an opportunity, however, to switch to a large number of smaller generators, and this distributed approach offers an opportunity for citizens and communities to get involved. Germany has an unusually high level of citizen involvement in the ‘Energiewende’.
Either way, the current situation is unacceptable, not to mention unsustainable. We are an often windy island, surrounded by wave power. We even sometimes get a bit of sun. There is also the potential for countless jobs in renewable energy. We cannot continue to allow the cartel of energy companies to run roughshod over consumers and businesses and the archaic obsession with fossil fuels and digging into the earth is based on nothing other than the greed of a select few. There is a need to change the narrative and literally take back power. Now is the time to start.
Ian Hodson (BFAWU National President)
Following on from BFAWU concerns prior to the introduction of the 'living wage', and how certain employers would seek to dodge their moral responsibilities, Channel 4 News recently broadcast an expose of companies who were exploiting the pay 'rise' by reducing the terms and conditions of their employees. For many, this has involved attempts at introducing consolidated rates of pay and removing both shift premium and overtime bonuses.
In the broadcast item, Channel 4 named Samworth Brothers (who own the likes of Soreen malt loaf among other well known food brands) as a particular offender. Since then, the issue of how companies are implementing the living wage has been debated in Parliament with Samworth Brothers once again being named and shamed.
A clip of the debate can be found here
Please see below statement from the Bakers’, Food and Allied Workers Union (BFAWU) in relation to the Fast-Food Rights Campaign and the Labour NEC’s decision to refuse McDonald’s a stall at Conference.
McDonald’s are coming under significant pressure. The UK’s Fast Food Rights Campaign, led by the Bakers’, Food and Allied Workers Union (BFAWU), has been protesting outside McDonald’s restaurants and organising fast-food workers for over two years, calling for zero-hours contracts to be scrapped, a minimum wage of £10 an hour and Trade Union rights.
We congratulate the Labour Party NEC on the decision to refuse McDonald’s a stall at their Conference and our members at McDonald’s both agree with and support this decision. The Labour Party was founded by, and is still part-funded by Trade Unions and Unions and MPs right across the Labour Movement support the Fast-Food Rights Campaign. It would be nonsensical not to mention, hypocritical if the party gave stall and advertising space to a company as blatantly anti-Trade Union as McDonald’s; an organisation which utilises deplorable employment practices such as zero hours contracts, and who as it now turns out, are pretty good at avoiding paying their taxes. This isn’t a case of Labour turning up it’s nose at fast-food, or the countless people that eat at McDonald’s; this is about the principle of supporting workers and their right to be paid properly and treated with dignity. This is exactly what Labour stands for, and they should be applauded for taking this stance.
The pressure is now starting to tell, as we now see McDonald’s’ taking the decision to offer all staff contracts of 4, 16 or 30 hours a week. This hasn’t come about simply because the company has had a change of heart. The truth is that significant protest has had an impact. We will continue to fight for a £10 an hour minimum wage for all and union rights. We say to McDonald’s: if you can re-brand so much in your stores, from store layout to children’s meals, then surely you can adapt your business model, with the mega profits generated by your workforce, to recognise your workers’ Union and meet with the BFAWU now.
For more information, please contact the BFAWU’s National President, Ian Hodson on 07739326010 or email: email@example.com
The BFAWU has laid bare the inadequacies of the 'living wage' ever since George Osborne announced that his government were going to introduce it.
During the lead up to it's introduction on April 1st 2016, companies within the UK food industry have moved heaven and earth to try and find creative ways of dodging their moral responsibilities with regard to pay. Many have moved to introduce consolidated rates of pay, while others are attempting to slash shift premium, unsociable hours and overtime pay rates/benefits. In other words, workers are being expected to fund the living wage themselves, whilst the pay and benefits of CEOs remain untouched.
On April 13th 2016, Channel 4 News exposed the reality of Osborne's 'living wage' and even went as far as to call out Samworth Bothers, an umbrella company who own the likes of Soreen among a number of other companies and who allegedly donated over £500,000 to the Conservative Party. Channel 4 News' revealing feature also exposed the hypocrisy of Tesco.
To watch the news item, please click here
The BFAWU has campaigned for the minimum wage to be raised to £10 an hour for the last few years and the campaign has really started to gain momentum with fellow Unions and politicians including Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn giving their backing this call.
In light of this, and a Fast-Food Rights day of action taking place on April 14th 2016, the BFAWU has decided to put pressure on the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne with an online petition to further support this call.
The BFAWU calls on all members, friends, MPs and affiliates to sign the petition, which can be found here
Addressing a fringe meeting organised by the BFAWU's Scarborough branch at the recent Young Labour Conference, Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn called on people to join and support the Fast-Food Rights global day of action which takes place on April 14th 2016.
In a wide ranging speech to an audience of more than 200, he praised the work of the BFAWU and the campaigns it has launched. Jeremy also spoke about the issues of mental health, with the need to end the stigma and give real support to people.
We thank Mr Corbyn for taking the time out of an undoubtedly busy schedule to speak to BFAWU members.
To watch a video of the speech, click here
BFAWU Greggs Representative, Executive Council Member and newly elected Full-Time Official for Region 5, Sarah Woolley reports from the Union's first ever Women's Forum, which took place at Whelley Labour Club, Wigan on February 27th 2016:
At our Annual Conference in June 2015, we recognised that female membership in the BFAWU had fallen by quite a significant amount. As I was the females’ Executive Council member at the time, I challenged branches to look inwardly at themselves in order to identify whether they were inclusive or perceived as a ‘boys only’ club. In addition to this, I 'put the feelers out' nationally around the regions in order to organise a Women’s Forum and on Saturday the 27th February, the BFAWU held its very first one in Wigan!
There was a fairly small group of us and we began the forum with an overview of discrimination issues and family friendly rights from Sadiq Vohra from Slater and Gordon Solicitors. He explained how complicated the new shared parental leave can be and how important it is to research every aspect of it before making any applications. But what resonated with me the most was when Sadiq spoke to us about harassment and explained that it is about how you feel. If you feel offended personally, no one can tell you that you don’t and that is what is important. As soon as you feel that way, it needs to be reported and all evidence collected immediately, as this strengthens cases.
We then looked at the courses that the BFAWU provide via the learning services and suggested developing a course based around keeping safe online, especially around social media sites. If you’re not careful, a whole world of information can be found out about you, as a few of our female activists found out when they were recently targeted by some very aggressive right wing groups.
We spoke in depth about the structural set up of the Trade Union Movement agreeing that in 2016, it is still very male orientated and even the strongest, loudest of women can easily be ‘drowned out’, which can severely affect confidence and actually put women off even attempting to become involved. This appears to be happening at all levels of the movement.
Women still hold the majority of the caring responsibilities at home; from looking after children to after they grow up and fly the nest before then in many cases, caring for ageing parents. This means that evening meetings may well be inaccessible and activism therefore takes a back step. We need to be aware of this as a movement and support women wanting to become active by making meetings more accessible for example; holding them in the morning or simply rotating the times/days.
Austerity hits women far harder than men and we suggested that as a Union, we should create more links with groups designed to support and help women through this, and even help develop them for the sake of our members.
As active women in our Union, we decided that we need to be the driving force of change. We need to work together, support each other and make our voice louder by way of our collectivism. By doing this I believe we can change the dynamic of the structure and make it a more balanced and equal one. We can no longer rely on others to do it for us!