By Julie Ward for North East Bylines

The population of Myanmar woke up on Monday to discover the military had enacted another military coup ahead of the installation of a new democratically elected government. Myanmar is one of those countries with such a complicated history that many of us prefer not to engage when bad news from the country flashes across the TV screens or pops up in print media. Our great grandfathers may have had stories to tell about medals for military service in Burma (as the country was then known) and our great grandmothers could recite Kipling’s poem “The Road to Mandalay”, but it is hard to reconcile these narrow cultural references with the modern-day state of Myanmar which experienced decades of military rule following independence in 1948 before Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Aung San Suu Kyi, became the de facto President in 2016 following years of house arrest.

However, in recent years the genocidal ethnic cleansing of the Muslim-minority Rohingya people in Rakhine State has become an issue for the international community, as hundreds of thousands of persecuted Rohingya fled across the border to Bangladesh creating a humanitarian crisis in their host country. Meanwhile, Rohingya who stayed in Myanmar continued to experience horrific racist violence, largely orchestrated by the military with little or no condemnation from Aung San Suu Kyi. In December 2019 she appeared at the International Court of Justice in The Hague to defend the charge of genocide brought against her country at the behest of Gambia and other Muslim-majority countries, but failed to impress the judges who ordered the Myanmar authorities to comply with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, including preservation of evidence.

In September 2020, whilst I was still a serving MEP, the European Parliament removed Aung San Suu Kyi from the prestigious Sakharov community of laureates in response to growing concerns about her lack of moral leadership. Meanwhile, competing geo-political interests have resulted in a variety of international responses with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi refusing to acknowledge the Rohingya (in line with his own discriminatory domestic policies targeted at minorities), whereas the Canadian authorities voted to strip Aung San Suu Kyi of her Canadian citizenship whilst recognising that a genocide had taken place under her watch.

The UK has a complicated relationship with Aung San Suu Kyi who studied at Oxford University and subsequently married British historian Michael Aris, bearing him two children who are both British citizens. In 2017 the then British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson said, “Aung Sang Suu Kyi is rightly regarded as one of the most inspiring figures of our age but the treatment of the Rohingya is alas besmirching the reputation of Burma. She faces huge challenges in modernising her country. I hope she can now use all her remarkable qualities to unite her country, to stop the violence and to end the prejudice that afflicts both Muslims and other communities in Rakhine. It is vital that she receives the support of the Burmese military, and that her attempts at peacemaking are not frustrated.”

The support of the military appears to be the key to everything in Myanmar, for it is a military coup that has now catapulted the country back into the headlines with the announcement of a year-long state of emergency following recent elections which had returned Aung Sang Suu Kyi’s NLD (National League for Democracy) party to power after they received more than 80% of the vote. Moreover, she and other NLD members have been placed under house arrest, a move which has angered much of the population who have begun to protest by banging pots and pans and wearing black ribbons.

The fragility of peace and democracy in countries like Myanmar demonstrates the huge importance of a common European approach to foreign policy in order to overcome the colonial legacies of the past. Britain’s colonization of Burma is sadly partly to blame for the marginalisation of the Rohingya who are still denied voting rights.

The EU’s High Representative Josep Borrell released a statement on February 1^st condemning the military takeover. Meanwhile the bloc will consider additional measures on top of existing sanctions that have been in place since 2018 which already include an enhanced arms embargo, suspension of cooperation with the military, travel bans and asset freezes. I await with bated breath to see Westminster take an equally principled approach.

By Andi Brookes

Private companies benefiting from billions in public money and political goodwill stand to profit heavily from selling vaccines to the Global South. Higher income countries, including Canada, Switzerland and the EU states, have even blocked efforts by the World Health Organisation to force companies to release the information needed to make the vaccines freely available to the world, which would have allowed other drug makers to manufacture them.

This refusal of access comes even as states such as the US and the UK hoard vaccine orders far larger than needed for their entire populations. Canada has bought up in advance five times as much vaccine as needed to cover its whole population.

At a fundamental level, vaccine hoarding during a pandemic is morally wrong. Global pandemics demand globalised vaccination efforts. Vulnerable groups and frontline workers across should be vaccinated as a priority, regardless of country. Otherwise catastrophes like those seen in the US or UK will unfold repeatedly, as the virus spreads.

Leaving SARS-CoV-2 to spread unchecked anywhere in the world also increases the risk of new strains emerging, with significant consequences. We’re seeing this already with the more transmissible B117 variant that emerged in the UK, and the new variants from Brazil and South Africa.

The latter two are not only more transmissible, but also show signs that vaccines or antibodies from previous infections may be less effective. Given that these new variants are spreading more easily, they could trigger new pandemics of their own. It’s naive of governments to think that vaccinating a single country can halt the coronavirus.

The Covax initiative, led by the WHO, aims to guarantee fair and equitable access to vaccines for every country in the world. However, it struggled to raise the $2 billion in donations it needed by the end of 2020. In contrast, the the US invested, via Operation Warp Speed, $10 billion across just seven companies.

Covax has now announced 1.3 billion doses for 92 of the poorest nations by the end of 2021, but vaccine access should never have been dependent on the largesse of billionaires and richer nations in the first place.

Instead, scientists and companies should freely release all intellectual property associated with Covid-19 vaccines to maximise production, and commit as a minimum to providing vaccines at cost globally. Otherwise, we’re missing not only a huge opportunity to prevent a resurgent pandemic, but also a chance to revolutionise the way pharmaceutical companies profit off human misery, pandemic or not.

By Martin Thomas

The Fire Brigades Union [FBU] is calling for an emergency recall Labour Party conference to protect democracy in the party.

FBU general secretary Matt Wrack announced the call at an online meeting on 7 February attended by over 400 Labour Party people and organised to demand the reinstatement of dozens of Constituency and branch Labour Party officers.

The dozens were suspended for allowing debate on critical motions following Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension, reinstatement, and withdrawal of the whip.

Other speakers included Tony Kearns, deputy general secretary of the post and telecom union CWU, and Ian Hodson, president of the Bakers’ Union. Unite assistant general secretary Howard Beckett was billed but absent with internet difficulties.

The Skwawkbox blog reports that 50 of those suspended have been reinstated (though with a warning, or “reminder of conduct”, finding them guilty of “not following the guidance of the General Secretary”). Alan Gibbons, secretary of Walton CLP, chaired the 7 February meeting and told it that he had a reinstatement letter, but other speakers said that only one other letter had yet definitely been received.

An analysis by John Stewart counts 91 CLPs passing motions which might have flouted the General Secretary’s bans, and 29 with officers suspended, a total of 56 individuals. That may not be all.

Skwawkbox claims, plausibly, that the reinstatements were due to Labour Party HQ fearing that it would lose legal cases over the suspensions.

Sadly, some speakers in the 7 February meeting identified the key problem with Keir Starmer as him having been too anti-Brexit. No one mentioned the background fact of the EHRC [Equality and Human Rights Commission] finding on Labour antisemitism. No-one talked about tackling antisemitism in Labour, although one of the big issues of the current clampdown is the barring of local Labour Party plans to organise educationals about antisemitism.

By Alan Gilbert

According to the Financial Times of 9 February, quoting local government finance expert Bob Whiteman, at least 12 further local authorities are on the brink as budget-making for 2021-22 approaches.

In November, Croydon’s Labour council issued a “section 114” notice, an emergency freeze on spending because it couldn’t balance its budget. Whiteman says the 12 are “the tip of the iceberg”. Six may avoid “section 114” by doing deals with the government to shift spending into capital accounts.

The Tories have cut some £15 billion from central government funding to councils since 2010. In 2020-1 councils have spent more and got in less income because of the pandemic, with the gap only part-filled by extra cash from Westminster. The impact varies widely between councils. Many have lost heavily from commercial ventures made for alternative income.

• London local government trade unionists and Labour activists have called a meeting on 23 February (7 p.m. on Zoom) to rally campaigns against cuts

By Mohan Sen

On 6 February, Keir Starmer spoke to a conference of the Labour group on the Local Government Association of councillors.He began with extravagant praise for various council leaders, and throughout the speech blurred between the idea that Labour councils are in a very difficult situation (true) and that their records are ones to be proud of (not true).In terms of the problems councils face, Starmer’s speech looked in the right direction. “Westminster has held onto powers that would be far better exercised [locally]… over the last decade, councils in England have seen their core funding cut by £15bn. Local government across the country is now facing a huge funding gap. It’s a shameful story… that story is about the long retreat of local government power in this country. It’s a story of centralisation and continuous cuts…“Thatcher, of course, wanted to turn back the post-war welfare state – but she didn’t want to return any power to local authorities. On the contrary, she wanted to crush local government, and cut funding even further. That was bad enough. But it was just a prelude to the assault on local government that occurred after 2010.”

Starmer referred positively to the expansion of local government powers in the late 19th century and to the post-war era.On the other hand he also referred positively to the Blair year, when councils did not experience swingeing cuts, but became ever more tightly limited by central government and ever less democratic in how they were run (cabinets, executive mayors, etc). During those years Labour council leaders pushed privatisation, outsourcing and the like with enthusiasm. All that should certainly give pause.Starmer gave a string of figures about the “local institutions [that] have disappeared” (youth centres, Sure Start centres, libraries, etc.)He promised to “keep pushing the Chancellor to provide the funding councils need – and were promised”. He gave no figure. He certainly did not commit to demanding and implementing reversal of all funding cuts the Tories have made since 2010.

Nor are Labour council leaders actively campaigning for that. Although they did call for it in 2018, through the Breaking Point campaign, they quietly abandoned the campaign and the demand only months later. The Corbyn leadership failed to back it, and certainly did not campaign to reverse all local government cuts – only to suddenly, at the last minute, drop a similar policy into the 2019 manifesto. Our council and party leaders, right and left, share responsibility for the failure to properly campaign to save local government services.In his speech Starmer promised to “end the long retreat of local government. And to empower our local leaders and local communities like never before.”There are very few details – and some references to regional devolution which, like the positive reference to Blair, suggest small, elected bodies or individual mayors covering very large regions, rather than genuinely re-empowered and meaningfully democratic local councils. The difference is crucial if we want to win radical, pro-working class policies and start to reshape society.Labour activists and trade unionists should push for more details, for genuine debate in the party, for a real re-empowerment of local government which must begin with massive investment in councils, reversing the damaging decade of cuts.

• Read Keir Starmer’s full speech at https://labour.org.uk/press/full-text-of-keir-starmers-speech-to-lga-labour-conference

• See also “A letter to my fellow Labour councillors” at https://leftfootforward.org/2021/01/stand-up-and-fight-back-an-open-letter-to-my-fellow-labour-councillors

The pandemic, in which many workers have needed to take fast, decisive action to guarantee safety for themselves, their loved ones, and the wider community, without going through an arduous bureaucratic process, has underscored the need to scrap all anti-strike laws. So does the wave of job cuts and attacks on terms and conditions (e.g., “fire and rehire”).

Other anti-strike laws, such as the ban on workers striking in solidarity with other workers, and on striking over political issues, are also an affront to democracy and a brake on democratic action. They prevent workers from taking action directly over issues such as climate change or racism.

Conference denounces the Tories’ plan to impose new restrictions on transport workers through a “minimum service requirement”. It seems likely they will extend this to other groups of key workers.

Conference notes TUC Congress 2020 agreed to “organise a special conference… on opposing the anti-union laws” and a national demonstration. The party should encourage CLPs to support and get involved in these when they become possible.

Conference reaffirms the party’s opposition to all anti-union and anti-strike legislation, its commitment to repealing all such laws when next in government, and to legislating to enshrine workers’ rights to, as per TUC policy: “join, recruit to, and be represented by an independent union; strike/take industrial action by a process, at a time, and for demands of their own choosing, including in solidarity with any other workers, and for broader social and political goals; and picket freely”. (249 words)

Proposed motion for Labour Party conference 2021, submitted by Southampton Momentum to the Momentum policy process for Labour conference.

Inequalities have worsened the impact of the pandemic; the pandemic has worsened inequalities.

The Marmot report “Build Back Fairer” says: “mismanagement during the pandemic, and the unequal way the pandemic has struck, is of a piece with what happened… in the decade from 2010… enduring social and economic inequalities… mean that public health was threatened before and during the pandemic and will be after.”

We commit to campaigning for and implementing:

Benefits increased to a liveable level. £260pw Universal Credit (TUC demand).
Extension and strengthening of furlough and self-employment schemes.
Increase in the minimum wage to £12ph, scrapping exemptions and differentials. Action to increase wages; substantial increases for public-sector workers.
The right to isolate on full pay; improved sick pay for all, 100% of wages for at least a period.
Repeal of all anti-union laws.
Banning of zero-hours contracts.
Reversal of all cuts since 2010, increased funding.
Comprehensive reversal of privatisation and outsourcing; full public ownership of health and social care.
Abolition of ‘No Recourse to Public Funds’.
Building of at least 100,000 council homes a year.
Creation of millions of secure, well-paid, public jobs in services and green industry.

The Resolution Foundation and Wealth Tax Commission estimate that concentration of wealth in the hands of the super-rich is even worse than previously thought – by £800bn! We need to take back wealth, including through a wealth tax, increased corporation tax, capital gains tax and taxing very high incomes; and taking banking and finance into democratic public ownership.

(247 words)

Motion passed by the CLP

Antisemitism is a genuine problem in the Labour Party; denying or minimising that obstructs our ability to tackle it. But an approach that views antisemitism as something that can be addressed primarily through technical bureaucratic measures shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how to challenge it. A serious political intervention to tackle antisemitism should begin with a campaign of education that allows members to first recognise and then challenge the reactionary thinking that underpins it. Labour can only now do so effectively if it facilitates debate and organises political education enabling members to recognise antisemitism in its various forms – including those which disguise themselves in the language of the left.

This branch proposes that our political educational officer will form a working group with other interested members and meet with members of Sheffield Heeley executive who have taken the lead on organising educational sessions for their wider membership, with a view to organising a series of discussions along the lines of the model they have successfully implemented in their constituency.
https://labourlist.org/2020/08/how-our-local-party-developed-an-educational-programme-on-antisemitism/