letters – Page 32 – The NEN – North Edinburgh News

Local group’s fury over ‘Bedroom Tax’ vote

North Edinburgh Women’s International Group has written to Labour leader Ed Miliband following a vote in the House of Commons last week:

Dear Mr Miliband

I am writing to you on behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group regarding reports in the news that 46 Labour MPs failed to turn up to the House of Commons to vote for a motion which could have led to the scrapping of the bedroom tax.

We are unable to understand how this situation could have come about. We can only assume that the 10 Scottish MP’s who failed to vote were unaware of the 150% increase in people using foodbanks in Scotland during the last year as a result of the current programme of welfare reforms. They must also be unaware of the warning from Shelter that “for many, the safety and security of a home is under threat like never before.”

We understand that Labour’s motion on the scrapping of the bedroom tax was defeated by only 26 votes. We would have thought that the recommendation by the UN Special Rapporteur on Housing calling for the bedroom tax to be suspended immediately would have had an impact on members of the Labour Party. This does not appear to have been the case.

We were under the impression that an important part of an MP’s job involves turning up to their workplace (ie the House of Commons) and voting on issues which affect the people they represent. We believe that 46 of your Party’s MPs have not been doing their job and we find this completely unacceptable.

The inaction of these MP’s demonstrates that the Labour Party does not represent the interests of ordinary people. It also suggests that the Labour Party does not care about the suffering and hardship experienced by many families as a result of the bedroom tax.

We are interested in finding out what the Trade Union Movement’s response is to the inaction of the 46 MP’s who represent the Party which they fund.

We are disgusted, angry and disheartened at what has become of the Labour Party. It is no longer the Party of ordinary people. Your Party has taken working class people’s votes for granted. You have insulted our intelligence by assuming that people would forgive and forget this terrible betrayal. This is a serious error which will cost the Labour Party at election time. The excuse of Labour MPs having been paired will not be accepted.

We look forward to your reply

Your sincerely

Anna Hutchison

On behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group

One week on, the group is still awaiting a response.

Forth Labour Councillor Cammy Day comments:

Responding to letter by the Edinburgh North International Women’s group

I agree with the Edinburgh North International Women’s Group in their letter dated 19th Nov in their deploring of the evil bedroom tax. As the deputy convenor of the Council’s Health, Social Care and Housing Committee I have seen first hand the damage it’s done, but I think your letter unfairly puts the blame of the existence of the bedroom tax on the Labour Party. It was the Labour Party who voted against the introduction of the bedroom tax from the beginning. It was the Labour Party who has campaigned to bring an end to it and promised that a Labour government would scrap it right away. This policy was brought in by the Coalition Government, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. They are the ones who made this unfair and pernicious tax, a law.

At Council level the Labour Party has prevented evictions in cases caused by the bedroom tax, something I was proud to be a part of in Edinburgh. At Holyrood they have voted against it and sought to bring in legislation to prevent it. I feel your letter leads people astray in their thinking, last week’s opposition debate by the Labour Party sought to highlight and reverse the government’s position. You are correct when you say that some Labour MPs did not vote for the motion. This was a result of pairing – where MPs from both opposition and government are paired when they cannot attend (either because they are ill, or because they have constituency or foreign business). This is part of our parliamentary system.

I hope you will reconsider your verdict on the Labour Party’s position on the bedroom tax. Only a Labour government in 2015 has committed to scrapping the bedroom tax and only a Labour government will continue the fight for the ordinary working class people you speak for. That’s why I am a member of the Labour Party and the trade union movement. We must stay together in this battle for a fairer society and show the coalition government of Liberal Democrats and Conservatives for what they damage the have done by legislating for the bedroom tax to exist in the first place and their wider attack of welfare reforms.

Cammy Day

Councillor – Forth Ward

Readers – it’s over to you!

Letter: Making it work

Dear Editor

I wrote to NEN in 2010:

‘The struggle of the labour movement, trade unions and others has always been to ease the burden of work and to improve wages and conditions of work. It has been a long struggle, great sacrifices being made but always holding out the hope that, at long last, the nation will be able to look after the youngest – giving them all the care and opportunity needed, and giving the oldest respect, dignity and the care they need. This is how it should be and the nation will be judged accordingly.

‘Now despite all the evidence of the correctness of that struggle there are serious moves to undo the good. Raising the retirement age from 65 – to 68 initially, then later on to 70 – is a thoroughly backward move. I believe the majority of people, having worked for an average of fifty years, welcome relief from the daily grind. There should not, of course, be a compulsory retiring age if an individual wishes to continue working.’

It is now November 2013 and:

there is a situation where there are over one million young people out of work, and older people are told they will have to work for years beyond 65. This is creating new problems for the labour movement and the trade unions to solve: how can we tackle these problems and obtain the best results?

As a counter-proposal to raising the retirement age, I suggest an individual option lowering the retiring age to 62. The skills, knowledge and experience of those taking the option can be used for the benefit of their communities by agreeing to do a maximum of nine hours paid work for those three years.

No doubt this example will raise many questions and problems, but organisations representing working people must discuss what options there are and which are beneficial to all.

The scheme would release jobs for young people.
The skills and experience of the older person would be available to the community
The older person would have some work satisfaction, respect and dignity and a better quality of life
There would be a steady replacement of people taking part for the benefit of the community.

Comments and ideas needed!

Tony Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: Offensive, Darling – bitter together

Dear Editor

I find it offensive that Alister Darling thinks that Scotland is not capable of self-government or of being a nation with full powers. How come small nations similar to Scotland can gain their independence and be successful, look after their people and economy without their neighbours ?

Lets look at what “Better Together ” has really done for Scotland. It has destroyed coal mining and ship building . It has given away our forests to the highest bidder,and our fisheries were sold down the river. Our whisky is taxed to the hilt . Gas, electricity,water and now the Royal Mail have all been privatised,but not for the benefit of ordinary people. Our hospitals ,schools and care homes can’t cope because budgets are cut year in, year out .

Scotland’s oil has been squandered to the extent that Mr Darling and his ilk say it’s running out, yet we are assured by experts there are still ample oil reserves. Denis Healey admitted to the people of Scotland that they were lied to in the 1970s about the oil supply running out then. New oil fields are being opened daily , weekly, monthly.

Under “Better Together ” Scotland has nothing – it all goes to Westminster! Our old , young unemployed , disabled , vulnerable are being driven into deeper poverty by a ‘better together’ UK Great Britain, whether you are a Tory, Labour or Lib/Dem.

As for George Osbourne telling the Scottish nation that should we get independence we would not be able to use the pound sterling? Have any Scottish people tried to exchange Scottish monetary notes in England ? It’s near impossible!

Another myth is having to use a Scottish passport to travel to England? Passports are not required to travel to the Republic of Eire. Yes identification is required but not necessary a passport.

As for defence Better Together have used their savage cuts to the MOD therefore Scotland has seen their regiments disappear. Teresa May’s recent comment that Scotland would be a target for terrorism. Scotland has been attacked once . We are more than capable of defending our country. How many times has England been attacked? Go back to the 1970s and as recent as the London bombings in 2012.

Any other nations who have gained their independence have never asked to be returned to their original countries.If the people of Scotland want more welfare cuts, ruled from Westminster, job losses, and unfair treatment of our nation , then I dare you never to be poor, ill, young, unemployed or old.

The Better Together campaign are scaremongering our nation. Scottish people have to realise that in the referendum we are NOT voting for any political party but to have the right to rule our own country . All I have heard from political parties has been the back stabbing of Alex Salmond for suggesting we can achieve independence . Joanne Lamont is one of the worst offenders. Having listen to her at the Labour Party Conference she put down Alex Salmond 23 times . ” Better Together “? More like “Bitter Together!”

Finally just to inform people I do NOT vote SNP – however I do want independence.

Stand up, Scotland and be a proud nation!

Anna Hutchison (by email)

Letter: Time, gentlemen, please

Dear Editor

People over decades have had to struggle very hard to get an increase in wages; the employers, when faced with a determined workforce, do eventually make some concessions.

The one thing they strongly resist is a reduction in working hours: the weekly wage they pay has bought your ‘time’, and the more work that can be had from that ‘time’ the greater amount pf profit can be made, whereas any increase in the wage bill can be clawed back in rising prices.

Development in technology over the decades has meant more can be produced using fewer people, so the logical thing to do was to reduce the working week/year so that all could benefit – but no way would the employers reduce working hours: your ‘time’ was paid for by the weekly wage.

Now in the 21st century the employers are taking things further, embracing zero contracts where your ‘time’ is now on-call as and when needed, your ‘time’ that is left is not their concern as it is unpaid but remains tied to their needs. How close is this to serfdom or tied slavery?

Think about it. Today the call is for everybody to work harder and longer. Where, how and why? And for whose benefit?

Further, in spite of the nation’s will to finance national schemes to help those who are unemployed, sick or disabled in their time of need, this Tory/Lib government have planned to make them work for nothing or lose benefit.

Imagine the delight of some employers, having this pool of free labour available! Perhaps you may think it wouldn’t happen, but maybe this Tory/Lib government would reinstate poor law relief officers dishing out food vouchers, etc. instead of benefit money. It would be in character!

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: public services paying the price

Dear Editor

Wage increases restricted to 1% maximum. Price increases averaging 3%, with gas, electricity and rail fares rising even more. This is not a one-off, it is a policy continuation over the last three years. Every working person is feeling the pinch, more so those on low incomes – in very many households the question of heating the home is decided by how much cold one can stand first.

Passing the cost of the colossal greed and mismanagement by the banks and financial institutions onto the people is bordering on criminal – especially as huge salaries and bonuses are still being paid to the people at the top, Their political supporters have been very busy making sure the people pay, but that is not enough for them.

They have also seized the chance to break up, privatise and destroy as many public services as possible – the very services, both local and national, that are needed more than ever. These services have been struggled for and paid for in taxation; they haven’t been given to us, this begs the question: how has the Tory/Lib government been able to do so much harm to so many?

First, any resistance had to be broken or diverted, pointing out people to blame, setting one section against another – those in work (‘hard workers’) against those out of work (‘layabouts’), people not on benefits against those on benefits (‘scroungers’), disabled people (‘shirkers’, or ‘work shy’). That so many people were taken in by these tales is a disaster, not only for the scapegoated but because every individual is under the same threat.

Emboldened by this success the Tory/Lib government felt confident enough to go even further and dictate how much space a hame needs (the ‘bedroom tax’) and in doing so giving the like-minded controllers licence to dictate, if on benefits, what people should or should not buy.

It is important every person listens very carefully to what is being told to them and why, and by defending others’ rights you defend your own.

The famous speech by Pastor Neimoller is really worth recalling:

First they came for the communists

And I did not speak out because I was not a communist

Then they came for the socialists

and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a socialist

Then they came for the trade unionists

and I did not speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak for me.

Most people have one asset, the ability to work; when the opportunity to exercise this is denied it has disastrous consequences on individuals and families, made worse by destroying public services.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: Social Profit

Dear Editor

The economic crisis was created by financial institutions and the banking systems, and they and their political supporters are now passing the cost onto the working population: cutting jobs, freezing wages and raising prices – causing widespread poverty and despair, not only in the UK but world-wide. This clearly shows their determination to protect themselves by any and all means.

All history shows that systems change: serfdom, feudalism, early capitalism, industrial capitalism to today’s financial capitalism. Each system in turn created problems they were unable to solve, but those who stood to gain most from the existing system strongly resisted any change.

The common factor of all these systems was that they were organised mainly for the benefit of the few. Today, the same is happening: financial capitalism moves money around the world to maximise their profits irrespective of the poverty created in country after country. As a system it can only operate in this way, engaging in what they call the ‘global race’ – this is fully backed by David Cameron.

A change of system is now needed, but it cannot be plucked off the shelf – effecting a change will involve everyone with ideas and determination to organise a social system to cater for the needs of all for life.

The NHS is one example of such social policies that can be ut into place, which everyone must defend alongside other social policies that exist. Social policies should include, for example: Rail, bus and air transport; gas electricity and oil suppliers, house building, care and security for the elderly and no privatising of schools.

Companies who own and control these indispensible industries operate for maximum profit at our expense: if operated socially it would bring about changes in the system.

Tony Delahoy

Silverknowes View

Letters: Winners and losers of the global race

Dear Editor

The repeated use of certain words and phrases, for example ‘let me be clear’, ‘openness and transparency’, ‘hub’, ‘flat-lining’ are very irritating; and ‘we must win the global race’, often repeated by David Cameron and most Tory politicians, is both annoying and dangerous.

Dangerous; when the state of the world needs nations to work together to solve problems of food production, fuel and energy supplies, diseases, protection of the world’s forests and climate change.

Dangerous; because ‘winning the global race’ means there are losers, creating disastrous unemployment, poverty and health problems.

There are many examples of companies engaged in the ‘global race’, making vast profits in one country, closing industries in others, showing little concern for people’s’ lives and wellbeing. The ‘global race’ does not exclude the working people of the UK from this exploitation.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Letter: Pension Plan

Dear Editor

Sometimes one hasn’t a choice but I would expect everyone would wish to have a long and good life. To achieve both ‘long’ and ‘good’ requires reliable and steady employment and a society that is run for the benefit of all – this has been the aspiration of past generations of workers who struggled to improve their lives; we owe them our gratitude and respect.

The same applies to the pensioners of today, who in their time have striven to create better conditions for all of us. Now today’s generation must help, protect and care for their parents and grandparents whose welfare at the moment is under attack from a vicious reactionary government determined to undo all the social progress fought so hard for.

People who are working today are the pensioners of tomorrow and the government’s sights are firmly fixed on them – by playing the ‘divide and rule’ game, pitting one section of people against another, they hope to achieve their aims.

People working today must rally to support their parents and grandparents (the pensioners); this would then be their contribution to the ongoing struggle to achieve a society run for the benefit of all.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Government pushes ahead with Royal Mail sell-off

Queen of the privatisers Margaret Thatcher thought the better of doing it, then New Labour’s Peter Mandelson tried but failed to do it but now it seems that it’s going to be third time unlucky as the coalition government moves to sell off the Royal Mail … a national asset that belongs to all of us:

Business Secretary Vince Cable told MPs yesterday: “Now the time has come for government to step back from Royal Mail, allow its management to focus wholeheartedly on growing the business and planning for the future. It’s now time for employees to hold a stake in the company and share in its success. This government will give Royal Mail the real commercial freedom it’s needed for a long time.”

Around 150,000 staff will be offered free shares when Royal Mail – one of the world’s oldest postal services – is sold off. It’s expected that the company will be worth snywhere between £2.5 – 4 billion when it is floated on the stock market later this year

Mr Cable said privatisation was necessary to ensure that universal service, which currently guarantees delivery to all parts of the country six days a week, can continue. Th government also says that the sale will give Royal Mail the access to private capital it needs to grow and remain competitive.

Royal Mail is currently refocusing it’s business priorities, targetting parcel delivery to cash in on the rapid growth of internet shopping as the number of posted letters falls due to the explosion of email. This change of emphasis saw Royal Mail more than double its profits last year after years of losses.

Ed Davey, minister for postal affairs, said the proposals ‘safeguard the future of both Royal Mail and the Post Office – two cornerstones of British life’, but there are many who are question whether the sell-off is either desirable or necessary – and industrial action looks likely.

Billy Hayes, general secretary of the Communication Workers Union, said: “The fact of the matter is the British public don’t want to see the Royal Mail privatised. Vince Cable is flogging this company to the very people he denounced at the Liberal party conference – the spivs, the speculators and those who just want to make a fast buck.” He went on: “Royal Mail is thriving in public ownership, increasing its profits, providing good quality services and decent jobs. We want it to remain that way. Privatisation would be a throwback to the tired old politics of the 1980s.”

Dave Ward, CWU’s deputy general secretary, said he expected members to be balloted before the end of September. “We will be balloting for strike action, we’ve already adopted that policy. I expect that policy to be ratified by the conference of the union at the end of July. That’s about our members’ terms and conditions, I want to make that clear. It’s about what we fear will happen with Royal Mail as a private operator – what we want is a legal binding agreement that protects their terms and conditions, their contracts of employment, their pensions, for the foreseeable future.

“I don’t think our members will be bought off by the free share issue,” he added. “I believe our members are too long in the tooth not to know the dangers of privatisation.”

Speaking after the announcement North and Leith Labour MP Mark Lazarowicz said: The Government has nationalised Royal Mail’s liabilities in the form of the pension fund in which there was a large shortfall and is now intent on privatising the profits. It argues that it is necessary to subject Royal Mail to commercial discipline and give it access to private sector capital but Royal Mail’s overall operating profits more than doubled over the last year from £152m in 2011-12 to £403m in 2013-13!

“A privatised Royal Mail might continue to operate the universal service provision of delivering 6 days a week to anywhere in the UK for the same price but for how long if its commercial rivals don’t have to? As with the East Coast Main Line, ideology seems to have won out over common sense – it will be private investors who benefit from its commercial success not the taxpayer or customers.”

Letter: Warning – pensions under attack

Dear Editor

Pensioners of today and tomorrow, be aware: the government is laying the ground for further attacks on pensions and pensioners benefits.

First, they have to divide opposition, for example by saying they wish to be fair by stopping the wealthy getting the winter heating allowance. It sounds fine, but does that mean the introduction of a means test for everyone to qualify? And who sets the level?

Other benefits, such as travel passes, television licence and free medicine prescriptions – things to help pensioners maintain some quality of life – are threatened: the government is looking to see if the nation can ‘afford’ them.

The campaign of setting one section of people against another is well-prepared, with millions of words and pictures; every person working or retired is the target. Just a few figures:

31% of the population are of retiring age; not all get a full pension as many qualifying conditions apply
The government is raising the age of retirement for women from 60 to 65 by 2018 and for both men ad women to 66 by 2020, with increases to 67 and 68 later on
The ‘full’ state pension is only approximately one sixth of the average age
The amount paid out in pensions from the total wealth produced in one year is approximately 5%, yet the percentage of the population’s pensioners is 31% (and most have contributed to a pension scheme throughout their working lives).

Just two further points: today’s working population, who now produce all the nation’s wealth, were raised, loved and cared for by our pensioners. Today’s working population and pensioners combined have massive voting power: use it!

Tony Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens