In the only national daily newspaper that would print this Oxfordshire Parish Councillor's Voice of Middle Britain, Neil Clark writes:
It's Grand National day. In 1937, the world's
most famous steeplechase was won by a horse called Royal Mail.
Just as well Vince Cable and George Osborne
weren't around then as they'd have flogged the poor animal off for a fraction
of its value - and left the old owners paying for its upkeep, with the new
owners able to pocket the profits of future wins.
For, of course, this is what they've done to our
Royal Mail.
Quite rightly, the price the Royal Mail was sold for has come under
attack, with the National Audit Office reporting this week that the
government's actions cost British taxpayers £750 million in a single day, but
while the fact that this national institution was sold for at least £1.6
billion below its real value is scandalous - and some would say criminal - it
would be a mistake to base our critique of the sale solely on the basis that
"they sold it off on the cheap."
For the fact is that even if the Royal Mail had
been sold at its proper value, it would still have been the wrong thing to do.
The Royal Mail was a profitable publicly owned
enterprise which had delivered an excellent service to the public for
centuries.
There was widespread public satisfaction with the
service despite the rise in stamp prices which were introduced in the lead-up
to the privatisation to fatten the business up for City investors.
A privatised Royal Mail will mean that the
universal delivery obligation will, sooner or later, be threatened.
Already since the sell-off we've seen another
increase in stamp prices, with first and second-class stamps going up to 62p
and 53p respectively and the announcement of 1,300 job losses.
This is only the sign of things to come.
So long
as the Royal Mail remains privatised we can expect more big increases in stamp
prices and a further reduction in the labour force as well as cuts in services.
This is after all what invariably happens to
publicly owned enterprises after they are privatised.
While of course the main responsibility for the
sell-off lies with Cable and the government, we shouldn't let Labour off the
hook.
Labour, remember, tried to push the idea of
selling a minority stake in the Royal Mail in 2009, a policy enthusiastically
supported by Blairites in the party.
The Conservatives called Labour's move "a
step in right direction."
And in 2013 Labour could have wrecked the sale of
the Royal Mail by making a clear commitment to renationalise.
That would have deterred would-be investors, but
instead shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna wrote: "I have been very
clear that we are not in a position to pledge to renationalise Royal Mail if we
get into government in 2015."
Why did Labour take this defeatist position?
As public ownership campaigners, our ire should
be directed not only against serial privatisers but also against those
politicians who criticise aspects of privatisation, but who fail to commit to
reverse the sales of publicly owned property when they return to office.
The coalition knew that the sell-off of the Royal
Mail would be unpopular but it was encouraged to go ahead because it believed
that Labour wouldn't do the one thing that could have sabotaged the sale -
namely, make a public commitment to renationalise.
The uber-Thatcherite Conservatives and Orange Book
Lib Dems currently governing us may be serial privatisers, but by their failure
to openly commit to renationalise, the Labour front bench are privatisation
enablers.
In the next 12 months we're going to bombarded
with propaganda from Establishment-approved "licensed radicals" in
the mainstream media urging us to vote Labour to get rid of the coalition.
But Labour's timid stance on the Royal Mail is
hardly a sign that things will be radically different if the party is returned
to power and I for one won't be putting a cross next to the Labour candidate's
name until the party makes a firm commitment to renationalise, at the very
least, the Royal Mail and our railways.
Last month I travelled to Serbia to speak at the international conference of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals.
Last month I travelled to Serbia to speak at the international conference of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals.
The event was held to mark the 15th anniversary
of the illegal Nato bombing of Yugoslavia, but the focus was not just on the
West's policy of endless war but on the violence of the neoliberal economic system
which Nato bombs are designed to protect and to help spread around the world.
Award-winning filmmaker Boris Malagurski gave a
passionate speech in which he described the impact that neoliberalism has had
on Serbia since the Western-financed "regime change" there in October
2000.
The gap between rich and poor has widened
greatly, unemployment has rocketed - up to 34 per cent if previous methods of
calculating unemployment had been maintained - and a whole generation of young
people are struggling to build a meaningful future.
In 2012 it was estimated that 100,000 people in
Serbia lived below the lower bound of the poverty line.
As bad as things are today for the majority of
people in Serbia, they look set to get worse.
Serbia's new neoliberal government has reaffirmed
its commitment to a new IMF deal and has pledged to "reform" the
public sector - in other words, to embark on a programme of mass privatisation,
in pursuit of its aim of EU membership.
While Western capitalists will be rubbing their
hands with glee - the Financial Times reports that "investors are likely
to be heartened by the result" of the election - the programme of the new
government will only mean more misery for the majority of Serbs who have seen
all the promises of a better future made by their politicians over the past 14
years come to nothing.
The first time I met and spoke to the late, great Tony Benn was on a march in London against the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
The first time I met and spoke to the late, great Tony Benn was on a march in London against the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
I asked him if he could sign for me a copy of his
book Arguments For Socialism, which coincidentally I had bought in a
state-owned bookshop on a 1998 visit to Belgrade, the city which Nato was then
bombing.
Arguments For Socialism was published in 1979 but
should be republished today, as it is as relevant now as it was then.
While defending the record of the nationalised
industries and public corporations, Benn realised that public ownership on its
own was not enough - we needed proper democratic control of the nationalised
industries.
"Herbert Morrison's achievement in
establishing our main public industries was a formidable one and history will
record it as such," he wrote.
"But it is now equally important that the
labour movement should turn its mind to the transformation of those public
corporations for our socialist purpose. Namely, that policies and institutions
must serve the people and not become the masters."
There could be no more fitting tribute to Tony
Benn than to make sure that when we do succeed in getting the Royal Mail, the
railways, the buses, the energy and utility companies back in public ownership,
that we also campaign for those new state-owned companies to be democratically
run and accountable.
We want publicly owned enterprises owned by, run
by and accountable to ordinary people, with the highest-paid employees in the
company only allowed to be paid five times the amount paid to the lowest, with
workers of the company and ordinary members of the public on the boards.
In other words, we don't want any kind of public
ownership, we want genuinely democratic public ownership of the sort which Benn
argued for.
No comments:
Post a Comment