The Tasks of the Working Class Movement
in the Wake of the TUC Congress 2013

Delegates lining up to ask questions of Ed Miliband

The basic task facing the working class movement in the wake of the TUC Congress 2013 held in Bournemouth remains to strengthen the organisation and resistance of the organised workers’ movement, and to fight for a change in the direction of society. The TUC Congress took a stand against the neo-liberal “austerity” programme, but to transform this into a genuine fight for the alternative the movement needs to fully cast away the illusions generated by the influence of neo-liberalism in the working class movement.

Perhaps more than anything, what epitomised these neo-liberal assumptions was the speech of Ed Miliband. When directly challenged whether he supported or opposed “austerity”, in the light of his speech which did not give a clear answer to this issue, he answered, of course, he opposed that agenda, but did not want to make promises a Labour government could not keep because of the need to stick to “strict spending
President of the NUS addressing Congress limits”. This is not the politics of the alternative, it is not the politics of fighting for a change in the direction of the economy, it is not the politics of challenging the fraudulent “austerity” agenda. It is based on outmoded and outdated assumptions that there is a finite amount which can be raised for the public treasury from taxes, that of course the rich should pay more than they at presently do, but that investments in social programmes are a “cost”, that workers’ wages are a “cost”, that pensions are a “cost”, and so on. The alternative in contrast is based on the principle that all workers in the social economy contribute to producing the national wealth and rather than just receiving their “fair share”, their claims on society should take priority over the demands of the private owners of monopoly capital. The status-quo is based on the denial of the rights of the working class and people, and the crux of the fight of the organised workers’ movement right at this time is for the affirmation and recognition of these rights.

The prevailing atmosphere of the 2013 Congress was that of getting further organised to
Matt Wrack,
general secretary, FBUresist the imposition of the fraudulent “austerity” agenda and to take up collective responsibility for the fate of society. It was not to toe the line or tamely submit to some other force or political party simply because it declares that it is pro-labour. What was weakest about the Congress agenda was the lack of recognition of the need for the organised working class to develop its own independent thinking, politics and programme. At the same time, there exists a strong determination that whoever advocates a programme against the public interest is going to get opposed by whatever means necessary by the workers’ movement. This is the fertile ground in which to develop the movement to build and strengthen the Workers’ Opposition, the opposition of the organised working class against the “austerity” agenda and fight for the alternative, for a new direction of the economy and for society, in which it is the working class which is empowered and in which the people are the decision-makers.

WWIE will deal with specific issues from the TUC Congress 2013 in this and coming issues.

The Future Lies in Fighting in Defence of the Rights of All!

Frances O'Grady addressing the Congress

When Frances O'Grady addressed the TUC Congress on the first day of the TUC Congress, it was much anticipated by the trade union delegates as she gave her address as the first woman General Secretary of the TUC. Right at the start, she said: “If we've learned anything since the financial crash, then it's this: politics is too important to be left to the politicians.” She continued that “people don't need us to tell them how tough life is for them. They want to hear the alternative. They want hope. And they want action.” And this very much set the scene and put this year's TUC Congress in the context which was the need to take a stand for the alternative. It not only signalled that the TUC was aiming to take forward its stand for an alternative to the austerity agenda of the government. It was also evident when Congress took a firm stand against the warmongering stand of the British government on Syria and demanded the “right of the Syrian people to self determination, as set out in the UN charter, which should be respected by all concerned”.

Frances O’Grady spoke out against privatisation of public services and the attacks on the NHS. She said that “if the Chancellor wants to talk numbers here's a big one. According to the Rich List, since the crash, the 1,000 richest people in Britain increased their wealth by no less than £190bn. That's nearly double the entire budget for the NHS.” She also opposed the privatisation of the education system and said: “We want our railways returned to public ownership. And let's send a strong message from this Congress – we will fight this latest senseless, sell-off of the family silver – hands off our Royal Mail.”

Elaborating on the significance of the role of the working class and trade union movement in society she pointed out that the trade unions making up the TUC have more than ten times the membership of all of Britain's political parties put together and that it may even be more. She said: “The truth is, we simply don't know. Because political parties don't have to account for their members, in the way that we have to account for ours. In fact, the Conservative Party refuses point blank to say how many members it has.” She pointed out that it is precisely this unrepresentative Coalition Government which is trying to deny the unions their political voice. This, she said, explained why in the same week they were debating a Lobbying Bill “designed to deny us a political voice”. It is a bill which she described as dangerous, and which must be defeated. Now, she said, they were debating the internal arrangements of the Labour Party and the role of its affiliated unions which she said was “not the business of Westminster, nor, indeed, of this Congress. And in the hall today we also have unions who are just as proud of their party political independence.”

Frances O'Grady said: “We are united in defending the basic democratic principle that ordinary people have the right to a political voice.” She said that the union money – “the few pence freely given every week, by nurses, shop workers and truck drivers – is the cleanest cash in politics today”. And she pointed out that whether unions set up a political fund “is a matter for members, not ministers,” and continued, “because for too long, politics has been controlled by those who already have far too much money and far too much power.”

That, she said, “is why we must now stand up for our rights. Not just union rights. Civil rights. People's rights.” She said: “We stand for popular policies to shift wealth and power from the few to the many,” and pointed out that the ruling circles act in such a way that “if they can't win the policy argument, then attack them as 'trade union demands'.” Then, she said, if they don't like what the trade unions say, they “call us 'union paymasters'. And if all else fails, then try the old trick of smears.”

Concluding her address Frances O'Grady called for “a new economy that puts the interests of working people at its heart. For our values of equality, solidarity and democracy. So that, together, we build a Britain of which we can be proud.”

This year's debate on health was in the context of the General Council Report on the work on health, and the composite motion “The future of the NHS”, which all highlighted what was described as the robust opposition by unions, patients, communities and NHS staff to the Health and Social Care Act 2012 and now focusing on opposing the implementation of the Act.

The Congress went on to condemn the government's use of the Francis report to denigrate the NHS and in particular focused the attention rather on the “damage being inflicted on the NHS in the name of efficiency savings and competition”. The Congress motion “The future of the NHS” called on the General Council among other things to “campaign to promote the value of a properly funded, accountable and publicly delivered NHS as the most fair and cost effective way of delivering high quality, comprehensive health care and to campaign to give NHS staff and local communities a genuine say in the future of their own local health services”.

As the General Council Report points out, the core agenda of the government has been to “break up public services through fragmentation and privatisation”. It is this wrecking of society that the General Council also agreed that the “TUC should bring together unions that were engaged in national disputes, or disputes of national significance”. In this context, the General Council Report says that there is agreement among the trade unions that any relevant industrial action “needed to be part of a bigger campaign including ‘mass community action’ against austerity”.

The mass actions of the people of Lewisham and Mid Staffordshire have been essential to this whole resistance at this time. The challenge for the working class movement is to ensure that the victory at Lewisham through a mass campaign, which involved the whole community, in mass demonstrations, a People’s Commission, in taking the struggle against the government into the courts, etc., becomes an historic point. It can serve as an inspiration and example in the fight of everyone to change the whole direction for the NHS and uphold the right to health care throughout Britain.

It is taking a stand for the alternative and planting the seeds of the Workers’ Opposition which will turn things around, not surrendering the initiative to any other force but basing the workers’ movement on its own thinking and independent programme and pro-social outlook.

On July 17, it was reported that Barts Health NHS Trust announced that it is at risk of “financial failure” and is planning major cuts. Barts Health was established on April 1, 2012, with the merger of six local hospital sites: Mile End Hospital, The London Chest Hospital, The Royal London Hospital, Newham University Hospital, St Bartholomew's Hospital and Whipps Cross University Hospital. This produced the largest NHS Trust in England. The Barts Health website misleadingly says “in the UK”. But NHS Scotland no longer operates on a Trust system, and the Trusts in NHS Wales operate in a different way. The north of Ireland has a system of health and social care such that administration operates in a radically different way.

The Fraud of “Financial Failure”

How can a Trust be in risk of “financial failure”? Health workers and professionals produce enormous value for the society, and the government must be duty bound to exercise its responsibility for the provision of health care as a right. In other words, talk of “financial failure” is a fraud, covering over that the arrangements that the government is willing to make all favour paying the rich and go against the funding of social programmes which are essential for a modern society.

A Guardian report of July 17 states that Barts Health is “losing £2m a week as a result of financial problems that raise questions about its future”. The report says that Barts “is preparing to unveil plans that could see cuts to its 15,000-strong workforce and services curtailed or dropped to help balance its books. Services at Whipps Cross hospital in east London, which the trust took over last year, are thought to be especially at risk. The trust … confirmed it is putting itself into ‘turnaround’ to tackle its financial problems. It is bringing in management consultants to help it achieve this and avoid going into administration.” The report continues, “Staff have been told that Barts Health has slipped dangerously into the red and is, according to its chief executive, Peter Morris, at risk of ‘financial failure’.” According to the BBC, Barts Health NHS Trust is talking about cutting 1,000 posts.

Barts Health Trust Board, however, denied that it plans to cut services. A spokeswoman for the Trust said: “The Trust have no plans to cut or remove services. We are currently looking at all the services we provide to identify and remove areas of waste and duplication and improve productivity and efficiency.” So, there are “no plans to cut or remove services”, only looking at the services to “identify and remove areas of waste and duplication and improve productivity and efficiency”! A cut by any other name! As if to emphasise the point, the spokeswoman continued, “We will only implement any significant change to our services following agreement with our commissioners and others.” Do the others include the health staff, all who work as part of Barts Health Trust and all its potential patients?

Chief executive Peter Morris wrote in an email to staff: "We are in the business of providing high-quality safe care and just like all businesses, whether in the public or private sector, we need to be a financially stable organisation. Currently we are not. The main causes of our deficit are poor cost controls across all areas, non-delivery of planned cost improvement programme schemes, reduced income through less procedures/treatments being undertaken as planned, and pressure within A&E. In quarter one [April, May and June 2013], every clinical academic group and some corporate directorates have exceeded their budgets, meaning that we do not have robust cost control measures in place. We are simply spending more than we have available. We need to reverse our current direction to avoid financial failure and protect services for our patients."

The chief executive is being disingenuous when he speaks of the “need to reverse our current direction”. He should have spoken of the “drive to intensify the anti-social direction” of the health service. That is to say, the neo-liberal, capital-centred underlying outlook and preconceptions that the health service is “just like all businesses” is abundantly clear from his statement.

Of course, one major way that the government pays the rich is by means of PFI – the “Private Finance Initiative” instituted by the Labour government. The BBC spells out the enormous cost of the new PFI Hospital at Whitechapel, £115 million a year! “One of its [Barts Health] biggest problems is the huge bill it is paying for the new Royal London Hospital site in Whitechapel. Opened in February by the Queen, it was part of a £1bn private finance initiative and paying back that PFI is costing the Trust £115m a year.”

The Threat to Whipps Cross Hospital

To underline the point that services at Whipps Cross, for example, are very much at risk, the Guardian report states: “Barts Health in London is preparing to unveil plans that could see cuts to its 15,000-strong workforce and services curtailed or dropped to help balance its books.”

This, however, is not all. Despite the denials that services would not be cut and redundancies not expected, the situation on the ground belies that. A climate of suspicion, accusation and doubt is created by hospital management. Barts have apologised because Whipps Cross received three “formal warning notices”, following inspections, which looks very much like a prelude to further attacks on and ultimate closure of the hospital, using the pretext that services could be better provided elsewhere. The onus is also being placed on nursing staff. Barts Health Chief Nurse, Professor Kay Riley, said that “we relentlessly pursue excellence and we strive for all staff to be compassionate, caring and committed.”

According to "We Are Waltham Forest Save Our NHS", Whipps Cross and other hospitals across East London are facing devastating cuts with 14,000 vacancies to be left unfilled, 323 nursing and admin jobs to be cut, the pay of 1,000 nurses and low paid nurses to be cut back, as well as a reduction in the number of specialist nurses.

Concern for Quality of Care at Whipps Cross

There is serious concern about significant cuts in both the capacity and the quality of care at Whipps Cross Hospital. Barts Health Trust is considering cutting facilities for the treatment of stroke victims without public consultation.

The stroke unit at Whipps is rated among top 25 per cent of stroke rehab services in the country. Yet it faces a reduction in beds and specialist facilities, which could undermine its current high standards.

According to the website “Save Our NHS – East London”, the proposed cuts could mean:

·A reduction in stroke patient capacity of almost 30 per cent at Whipps, from 27 to 19 beds.

·Two wards being merged into one meaning acute stroke patients in close proximity to those further along the road to recovery. Their needs can be very different.

·The loss of vital facilities, including a specialised gym. Therapy activity is at the heart of the rehabilitation process for stroke victims. The dedicated gym with specialist equipment is a key element in the quality of care.

·The loss of more than 30 nursing and expert, qualified staff posts in stroke units across Barts Health Trust.

An Attack on All Health Workers, Part of the Offensive against the NHS, and Intensifying its Anti-Social Direction

Charlotte Monro addressing meeting
of "We Are Waltham Forest" It is in this context it now appears that concerns put to the local Adults and Older Persons Scrutiny sub-committee about proposed cuts to the Stroke Rehabilitation and Acute Services at have resulted in Barts suspending a Whipps union representative, Charlotte Monro, from Trust consultation forums over trade union activities in support of staff and local health services. Barts is also threatening disciplinary action for raising concerns in defence of services.

Press Release

The Unison Waltham Forest Health Branch issued a press release on July 18 which stated: “Health workers and campaigners are outraged at the news that Barts Health Trust is threatening disciplinary action against a long-standing trade union activist at Whipps Cross Hospital.

“Charlotte Monro, the chairperson for Unison at the hospital, has been barred from representing members at the Trust-wide staff consultative forum pending an investigation in connection with her trade union activity. This is happening at a time when Barts Health Trust has announced concerns over its finances that could threaten the jobs and the future of Whipps Cross Hospital. The move has been condemned in a letter sent from Unison to Barts Trust Chief Executive Peter Morris calling for the disciplinary threat and ban to be lifted. Branch secretary for the union Len Hockey said: ‘We take this extremely seriously as an attack on the right of our union and any trade unionist to represent their members effectively and to organise and to speak out and campaign in defence of staff and services. Charlotte has a record over many years of campaigning in defence of health workers and health services including to save Whipps Cross Hospital and is widely respected in the hospital and local community.’

“The union’s branch committee has voted ‘to take every action necessary to stop this attack’.”

In the view of WWIE, the suspension of Charlotte Monro, a long standing union activist, and the disciplinary accusations represent an attack on all health workers and is part of the offensive against the NHS and a component of the intensification of its anti-social direction. In particular, it appears as a component of the offensive against Whipps Cross Hospital.

WWIE condemns the action against the Waltham Forest Health Branch Chair and calls on all to take a stand in defence of a health service which serves the interests of the people and to vigorously oppose all attempts to further privatise the NHS and use it as a source of profits for the monopolies.

The organisation “We Are Waltham Forest Saving Our NHS” has taken up a campaign against the attempt by Barts Health NHS Trust to stifle public debate and the climate of threat to union reps who raise concerns in the community. See more at: http://saveournhs-el.org.uk/?page_id=1502

As patients and residents of Waltham Forest and adjacent areas, we are seriously concerned by the proposed cuts to the highly regarded Stroke Rehabilitation and Acute Services at Whipps Cross University Hospital. We are alarmed that Barts Health NHS Trust is attempting to stifle public debate on this potential service reduction.

Throughout 2013, campaigners from We Are Waltham Forest: Save Our NHS have used official channels of communication to various NHS authorities and bodies to promote public engagement with health issues.

It now appears that concerns put to the local Adults and Older Persons Scrutiny sub-committee have resulted in Barts suspending a Whipps union representative from Trust consultation forums over trade union activities in support of staff and local health services. Barts is also threatening disciplinary action for raising concerns in defence of services.

We believe members of the community and elected representatives have the right to talk to and consult NHS workers and managers, and their unions or professional bodies, without fear of individuals being disciplined. Indeed, Waltham Forest CCG has amended its Constitution to incorporate a policy on whistle-blowing, including the statement that ‘the existence of a confidentiality clause does not in any way ‘gag’ – either intentionally or unintentionally – any individual who may wish to raise concerns in the public interest’.

We, the undersigned, are opposed to any cuts to the stroke service at Whipps Cross Hospital. We are alarmed that further service reductions at Whipps are probable given the Trust’s present financial position.

We expect Bart’s to behave in an open, accountable and responsive way towards all the communities it serves.

We ask that your organisation responds to our concerns over transparency both in terms of general principles – now and in the future – and with particular regard to Whipps’ Stroke Unit and the current perceived climate of threat to union reps who raise concerns in the community. We request your organisation details what action it will take according to its role within our local health service.

Yours sincerely

See more, and sign the Open Letter to all NHS health authorities and bodies in Waltham Forest, which to date has received over 500 signatures, at: http://saveournhs-el.org.uk/?page_id=14032#sthash.Mi2A4CGf.dpuf

The recipients of the Open Letter are: Chief Exec and Directors Barts Health Trust; Chief operating officer Waltham Forest Clinical Commissioning Group; Chair Waltham Forest Health, Adults and Older Persons Scrutiny Sub-Committee; Healthwatch Waltham Forest; cc local MP’s Stella Creasy, John Cryer, Ian Duncan Smith

London Evening Standard

Ross Lydall, Health Editor, August 23, 2013

Britain’s biggest hospital trust has suspended one of its main critics as it prepares to axe a “significant” number of nurses to save cash.

Barts Health is to force 1,000 staff, from healthcare assistants to matrons, to compete for jobs as it reorganises nursing cover across its six hospitals.

Charlotte Monro, the long-serving Unison chairwoman at Whipps Cross Hospital in Leytonstone, has been removed from a staff and management forum and threatened with disciplinary action for raising alarms about job losses.

She has also been accused of a conflict of interest after accepting an invitation to tell local councillors of her concerns about the downgrading of a stroke unit at Whipps Cross. Union colleagues have accused the trust of acting like a “kangaroo court” for targeting Ms Monro and have called on east Londoners to defend services at Whipps Cross and Newham, which they say are victims of the £7.1 billion PFI bill at Barts and the Royal London hospitals.

A 45-day consultation will establish who to retain following the merger of Barts and the London, Whipps Cross and Newham hospital trusts in April last year. About 400 of the nursing staff are involved in front-line care, with the remainder in managerial positions or support functions. The number of job losses has not been decided.

Ms Monro said senior nurses, ward managers and matrons were at risk. “They are the bedrock of providing care,” she said. “They are the people who stay for hours after work. They are the people who come in on their days off. One of the main objectives of the trust is to reduce the number of agency staff and have permanent staff. But they’re targeting the very people who can make it a place where people want to stay.”

John Lister, director of London Health Emergency campaign group, accused Barts of an “outrageous series of attacks” on health care. He said: “If you take away the [senior] nurses, how are you going to improve services? This is picking on Whipps Cross to fund a crisis built at Barts and the London.”

Barts has also appointed troubleshooter Donald Muir to work alongside accountants from PriceWaterhouseCoopers on its “financial turnaround” project to tackle a projected £50 million debt. Mr Muir was blamed by Rangers fans for being instrumental in the financial chaos that engulfed the club and saw it relegated to Scotland’s lowest league last year.

A Barts spokesman said the reduction in nursing was part of the integration of the six hospitals. It had not come from the “turnaround” hit-squad.

He added: “Some people will be rebranded. Some people will be found other appointments.”

President Al-Assad being interviewed
by Fox News, September 19, 2013The British government has continued its bullying and interventionist stance towards the Syrian Arab Republic following the recent report by the UN mission sent to investigate the use of chemical weapons in that country, the decision by the Syrian government to sign the Convention on Chemical Weapons and the parliamentary vote which opposed the use of force against the Syria.

The UN mission submitted a detailed report that produced evidence confirming that chemical weapons had been deployed in the Ghouta area of Damascus on August 21, but it did not make and was not mandated to make any pronouncement about those responsible for using such weapons. The UN mission will continue its work and investigate other allegations involving the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Several allegations have in the past been made against the opposition forces in Syria in regard to the use of chemical weapons, most notably by a member of the UN’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry.

William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, welcomed the report and immediately stated, “Nothing in the UN report contradicts the conclusions of the Joint Intelligence Committee last month: on the contrary, the new evidence increases our confidence that the regime was to blame.” He went on to assert that is was essential for the Syrian government to be given an ultimatum to destroy its chemical weapons within a specific timeframe and demanded that efforts are made to “ensure accountability” for those responsible for using such weapons and for war crimes. The inference was that Britain and its allies would be those making such efforts. In addition, Hague made it clear that the government will continue to support what it refers to as the “moderate opposition” in Syria. Thus the British government is declaring that it will continue to ignore Syria’s sovereignty and will demand and organise regime change. This is unacceptable.

New York City, September 10, 2013 Similar threats and demands were made by the British government’s closest allies, the government of France and the US, which have both signalled their willingness to launch military strikes against Syria, despite the opposition of the majority of people in both countries. Opposition to war in the US appears to have contributed to creating the conditions for the recent diplomatic agreement with Russia made in Geneva. The government of Russia, one of Syria’s closest allies, has maintained that it had “serious grounds” for believing that the August 21 attack was a provocation organised by the forces of the Syrian opposition. The Foreign Minster of Russia also recently made clear the view of his government that any UN Security Council Resolution on the decommissioning of Syria’s chemical weapons would not involve the threat of military force. The big powers have all voiced their support for a peace conference in Geneva involving all political forces in Syria. Such a meeting has also been welcomed by the government of Syria but is opposed by the Syrian National Coalition, the opposition forces backed and funded by Britain and its allies.

The government of Syria has explained that while it is ready to sign the Convention on Chemical Weapons, it also expected the US and its allies to cease their threats of military strikes and to stop arming what it referred to as “terrorists” in Syria. In a recent interview, President al-Assad pointed out that the US had previously opposed a Syrian proposal to eliminate all WMDs in the region since this would have exposed its ally Israel, the country with the largest nuclear and chemical arsenal in the region, a country that has used chemical weapons and one of the few never to ratify the Convention on Chemical Weapons. Neither the United States nor Russia have met the deadlines stipulated under the Convention for destroying their stockpiles of chemical weapons, while the use of chemical weapons by the US military in Iraq in recent times is well documented.

Damascus, Syria, September 9, 2013 The crisis in Syria, in which Britain, the other big powers and their allies have played a major role, continues to have dire consequences for the Syrian people and those of the region. Tens of thousands have lost their lives and many more have been injured or forced to flee their homeland and seek refuge abroad. It is clear that the problems confronting Syria cannot be resolved by the use of force and are being exacerbated by its use and by the continued interference and threats of Britain, the other big powers and their allies, whose actions are contrary to international law and the UN Charter.

The government of Britain and its allies must be condemned for threats and provocations against Syria and similar threats against Iran and the DPR of Korea. Condemn the British government for its hypocrisy and disinformation about the use of chemical weapons and for its attempts to use force to bring about regime change! No to its warmongering and interference around the world! Uphold Syria’s sovereignty!