GEORGE SAYS THANKS

Credit for this goes to the South East Essex R&C PCS website.....

GEORGE SAYS THANKS

George Osborne last night sent his grateful thanks to the 21% of HMRC staff who came to work on Thursday 10th.

"Its really appreciated," he said from his £million+ mansion last night. "Every person who came to work made the industrial action taken by their colleagues that little bit less effective."

"And of course, it wasn't just yesterday's efforts that you hampered," he went on. "Every person who doesn't take action is sending me a clear message - that they will just roll over and take anything I care to dish out. It makes me that much more confident that next year we will be able to take even more without them making a peep. We're taking about twenty quid from everyone, every month, forever starting this year, and I was going to take another twenty next year as well - but since so many people seem happy with what I'm doing, I'm going to put proposals before Parliament to make that forty instead - or fifty, maybe."

Osborne admitted however that not everyone came in to work willingly.

"Of course some people would find it financially hard to take action," he said, pondering how to spend his £6,000 a month take-home pay. "Its all part of the plan. I let my banker buddies screw up the economy (while they made millions), then I bailed them out with your money, and now I'm taking even more from you to pay for it! Its all part of the plan to keep the little people downtrodden and to break their spirit. And of course the best part is that sure - they'd have lost about eighty quid each, but if they'd ALL taken action, then I'd have had to re-think taking the couple hundred quid I'll be grabbing from them over the course of the year. Not to mention the couple hundred more I'll grab next year - and the year after that."
Osborne was also amused at some of the reasons people gave for crossing picket lines.

"'I'm the only person in today, and there's a lot of work to do?'", he chortled. "What a fantastic way of looking at things! Those are the people I love the best, because they are the ones that mean the action their colleagues took had the least effect! The whole point of action is for work not to be done, so I'm dead chuffed that so many people just don't get it!" he smiled, revealing his double rows of pointed fangs.

And there was no hope for the future, Osborne insisted.

"While we can keep the people poor and tired and miserable, then our plans are working," he said, removing his contacts to reveal the yellow goat-slit pupils beneath. "We will keep on taking, year after year, as they swallow our lies about 'all being in it together' - of course we're not, there's the little people who do our bidding, and the sociopathic elite who get rich from the fruits of their labour."

His flesh peeling away to reveal the molten bronze beneath, Osborne gave his last thoughts.

"And until enough of them stand up and say 'enough', there is nothing that can stop us," he roared, spreading his wings of darkness tipped with venomous claws. "We will keep on, and on, and on, pushing retirement back, and back, and back until they are all so worn out and used up that we'll only be paying them their pittance of a pension for a couple months after we finally allow them to rest their shattered carcasses.

"Now tremble before me, worthless subjects, and despair!"

WHAT A PRESIDENT SHOULD DO

When I was selected as the Left Unity Presidential candidate I thought very hard about what a President should be and what sort of President the Group needs in what are difficult times.

Firstly, and probably most importantly, I think the members need to know who their President is. Sitting behind a desk in Clapham and hiding behind an email address has never been my style. How are we are supposed to represent members if we do not talk to them? How are we supposed to gain their support if we do not explain what is going on to them? So, if elected as President I intend to be visible and accountable, I intend to engage properly with Branches and members. I do have a Departmental job, I do understand from first hand experience the problems we all face in our day to day working lives.

A lot has been said about the words “sexy political”. It is important that we always understand that we represent members in Revenue & Customs Group first and foremost, but that must include involving ourselves fully in the national unions campaigns. For me the words “sexy political” refer to pay, privatisation, pensions, job losses and office closures. These are political decisions being taken by the Government. Having spoken at several AGMs this year, it is clear to me that our members expect us to be doing the “sexy political” stuff. They expect their union to be fighting as hard as it can to protect us from privatisation, protect our pensions and secure us a proper pay raise. That said, we must never forget the bread and butter issues. I have spoken to many reps across the country, and I know how hard they work in personal cases, advice to members, local negotiations, health and safety and the learning agenda to name but a few. To suggest our reps do not do this simply undermines them in a time when we really need everyone working together for the same ends.

I know that our union is built on the membership. Without the membership we do not have a union. I know our members are aware of the issues that effect them on a day to day basis, and I know they have the right to change union policy through motions to conference. Whilst I may not agree with every motion that goes to Conference and at times I may think a Conference is unhelpful, members have the right to submit what they like to AGMs and to Conference. That is called to democracy, and democracy is the cornerstone of our union. To suggest motions are “ludicrous” frankly insults those members who do pen motions and those members who agree them at AGMs.

Finally, I think the President needs an understanding of campaigning. I’ve not seen that this year from the current incumbent. I’ve been involved in campaigns for many years – not always wearing my PCS hat. I understand tactics and strategies; there is no point in taking up a campaign if you don’t have a plan. We have to campaign on a raft of issues, be that protecting our office from closure, be that protecting us from losing our jobs or be that protecting us from the horrors of privatisation. I know that if we sit back and do nothing, then bad things will happen.

So essentially, if elected, I aim to be a President you can trust. A President that will try to do what is right by the membership. A President that wont accept second best in negotiations and a President that will stand shoulder with the membership during disputes and campaigns.

I know the amount of work Left Unity GEC members do during the course of the year, sometimes in their own time and at own expense. I know that it is Left Unity GEC members who provide the ideas and drive to make things better.

I’ve never hidden my Left Unity membership and am proud to be able to consider myself a socialist. I do not subscribe to the view that others stand outside of other factions or groupings, I just know that we are open and honest enough to tell you we do. Any candidate who puts a list of names at the bottom of their election address are standing as part of a grouping. To say otherwise is hiding the facts.

DEATH OR BENEFITS

I have been lucky. I left college at 17 armed with more than a few O Levels and found a job in the Civil Service. Fair enough, I only intended to stay there a while until something better cropped up, but nothing ever did. As a result I've now got 26 years service to my name. One of the things I vividly remember was my grandfather telling me that I would get a decent pension, I was working for a decent employer and that civil servants were respected by all. He'd be spinning in his grave if he knew what had happened since.

Something else I was also brought up with was a strong work ethic. A fair day's pay for a fair day's work - and never rely on handouts or the generosity of everyone. That said, I recognise how lucky I've been to avoid the dole queue, the labour market and the job centre. I do however fear for my two children as they will be leaving school (because I can't afford to send them to Uni) during the end of this Cameron Government.

Now never having to need the services of what we now call the DWP, I look in despair at my autumn years. The Government will be raising my pension contribution by £68 a month. I've done the maths, and if I am honest, I am not sure how I am going to meet my out-goings, pay my bills, pay my mortgage and put food on the table. Somewhere, something is going to have to give. The only option I appear to have is to sacrifice my future pension contributions. I know this is wrong, I know this is socially irresponsible, I know that my plans for my retirement will need to change drastically and I know that come the time I am finally pensioned off (and when is pretty much anyone's guess) I will need to rely on state pension subsidies.

So, come my retirement I become dependent on the state. I become a drain on the resources of the next generatons.

And I am not alone. Across the public sector people are starting to do the maths. People are starting to panic about how their contribution rises will effect their households. All this against a backdrop of 5% inflation, a maximum of 1% pay rise over a five year period and spiralling energy costs. Many are coming to the same conclusion as me - give up your future pension in order to survive today. Its a terrible dilemma. And its a scenario the Government haven't considered. A recent survey suggested 33% of public servants will pull out of their pension scheme when the changes come in. That somewhat defeats all the mathematics and forecasts currently on the table. No one has thought about how to deal with mass resignations from the pension scheme. With no contributions, the pensions funds can't grow without state assistance; but accrued pensions will still need to be paid come the time. Its possibly the worse bit of financial planning I've seen since the day of Norman Lamont.

On a more personal and scarier note, the only way I am likely to avoid being a state dependent is not to make it to retirement. I don't consider myself particularly unhealthy now, but as a smoker with a fairly poor diet, I suppose that at some point chickens (southern fried, of course) will come home to roost. Currently I can retire at 57 (40 years service), but under the new "and improved" scheme, I am now looking at working until I am 67 or 68. I'm not backing myself to make it that far. Even if I do, I've little to look forward to.

HYPOCRISY RULES, OK

Hypocrisy is the pretence of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess. It is somewhat different to lying, which is the telling of untruthful statements. Lying is often applied to politicians, albeit in more Parliamentary language. Hypocrisy, however, is not so readily applied, so lets have a go.

David Cameron. You may have heard of him. He is the shiny faced smug twat that runs the Conservative Party and is currently leader of the coalition government. He is quite quick to condemn others for their behaviour. About a year ago, you will recall, students marched through London. A small number of them caused a bit of bother in central London. His immediate knee jerk reaction was to state that those that caused trouble should face the full force of the Law. On the face of it that seems a perfectly reasonable response for a Tory. However, Mr Cameron had previously come out with the following – “we smashed the place up a bit and Boris set fire to the toilets”. Boris, of course, is Boris Johnson the current Mayor of London. This quote was said after a particularly boisterous night out with the Bullingdon Club – an Oxford University club famed for the wealth of its members and its destructive binges. So, Cameron freely admits to smashing places up when he was a student. Did he face the full force of the Law? I think you know the answer.

Now, step forward the Rt Hon Member for Horsham. The one and only Francis Maude. Francis is currently not negotiating with the unions over public sector pensions. I would put a definition for “negotiation” but it seems there is somewhat of a difference of opinion between the standard English Dictionary and the Tory version of the word. The latter pretty much defining it as “telling you how it is with no room for manoeuvre”. Anyhow, Maude will tell anyone who listens that public sector pensions are unaffordable and unattainable (and this falls into the “politicians lying” category). What he doesn’t confess to is his own public service pension. A pension that will see him get a lump sum of £731000 and a yearly payment of £43000. He is happy to take and steal from those that can’t afford, but his own pension pot is secure and not faced with a cut. Francis, not only do you lie, you a hypocrite of the highest order.

And finally, Michael Gove, the floppy faced Education Minister. Recently on SKY news he described my union (PCS) as a bunch of Trotskyites. He preferred to sling names at trade unionists rather than negotiate with us. He also debunked unions and those that take action. Back in the 1970s Gove was a journalist, not only that, he stood on picket lines during times of Industrial Action. So, when it is good enough for Gove to stand in the howling wind and slashing rain to defend his terms and conditions that’s fine. When it is someone else doing it, we are demonised as Trotskyites. Gove, I am embarrassed that you were ever a member of a Trade Union.

Of course the biggest line in hypocrisy belongs once again to the Shiney Faced Smug Twat. He says “we are all in this together”. What a crock of shite, clearly some of us are all in it together. The "it” is brown, smelly and sticky and the “some of us” are those of us unfortunate not to be independently wealthy, taxing off shore or running the Government. What he should have said is “you lot are all in it together, whilst I and my kind will continue to have our noses in the trough”.

A Day in the Sunshine

I’ve got plans for the end of the month. Specifically November 30th. I intend to get up well before the sun pops its milky winter face over the horizon. I don’t like getting up, I don’t like mornings, but on 30th November I will make an exception. At that time of the morning and at that time of year, its going to be cold. Very cold. Even down here on the Costa Del Essex it could well be somewhere below freezing. I’ll make sure I wrap up especially warm, I am going to need it. Why am I doing this?

Well I want to be at work very early. Very early indeed. Though I don’t intend actually going to work. I intend standing outside it for several hours. Holding a placard and occassionally shouting some slogans. If I am lucky I might get to speak to various members of the public who are passing by, some of which will no doubt work for various media outlets.

Last time I did this was 30th June, in glorious sunshine. It was a really good day, because I didn’t have to shout any slogans at people who work in the same place as I do. Because none of them came to work. Well some did, but they stood outside with me. I am more than hopeful it will be same in November, except somewhat colder.

In order for me to have my day in the sun (or snow as it may well be), I will sacrifice about £50 of my salary. That may seem a lot, and it is. But its not a lot as £63 every single month until I retire (or more probably die). When you look at like that, its not bad odds. You see, whilst many may grumble about not coming to work on 30th November because of the financial implications, every single one of them knows that the financial implications of losing this dispute are a lot more serious. For some, it will result in total financial meltdown.

You see the crux of this is that the country is in debt. A considerable amount of debt. Now, I don’t know about you, but I don’t recall spending trillions of pounds in recent years and I don’t recall betting billions of pounds on the money markets and losing. (though I did win £44 on a football bet some time ago). I do, however, remember paying my all my taxes at the correct rate and the right time. Unfortunately there are plenty out there, mainly those with a lot of money, have spent trillions, have lost big time on the markets and don’t pay their taxes.

You would think that any fair and sensible government would ask those people to pay back the money they’ve lost, wasted or stolen. No, this government decides to steal from those who can least afford it whilst the guilty ones continue to snuffle in their troughs.  And not only that, I will be paying for this until the day I die. Me and millions of other ordinary working class people who just happen to work in public service.

And that’s why I will be standing outside my workplace on 30th November. That’s why millions of public sector workers will not be going to work on 30th November. That’s why this isn’t just a dispute about our pensions, it’s a straight faced, hard nosed rejection of this government’s policy. Government is supposed to be by the people for the people. This government is simply by some of the people for a limited amount of people who can afford it.

ITS WHAT TORIES DO

For those of you young enough not remember the late 80s, the savagery of Thatcher’s Government, mass unemployment and the birth of the yuppie generation, you are in for a shock as long as David Cameron and George Osborne hold onto the strings of power.

Tories are Tories, and Tories look after Tories. They like big business. They like the rich. They never deflect themselves from their aim of looking after their own, and if this means that those of us who need a helping hand, a few more pennies, a bit of security or generally find life tough at times go without then so be it.

The recent riots are an excellent example. In the immediate aftermath, Cameron was blathering on about fatherless children. The demonisation of single mothers has started once again. He failed completely to comprehend that many single parent families (be that one with a mother or a father) work much better than “traditional” families. He fails to recognise that many single parents work very hard to bring up their children. He fails to recognise that is just as likely that kid from a “traditional” family can fall into mischief as one from a single parent family. But that’s ok. Tories like traditional families, so they don’t care if the upset single parents.

Another example are the comments from Philip Davies, MP for Shipley. His comments really upset me because he was the MP who managed to obtain the costs of Compliance Officers in HMRC, something we used to great effect when campaigning to keep our jobs. But now he is in power, he shows his true colours. He basically said that employers should be allowed to employ people with disabilities at less than minimum wage. His logic went along the lines of giving disabled people a chance to prove themselves in society. He completely missed the point that people with a disability do not need patronising in that manner. Many who are able to work, do so. If they do work then they shouldn’t be regarded as slave labour by greedy employers.

And on the other hand Osborne talks about Welfare Reform, and that’s just a neat Tory phrase which translates as “paying less to fewer”.

And finally, we’ll again look at the post riot comments, specifically that rioters should lose their benefits and council houses. That is a massive (and incorrect) assumption that the people who rioted are unemployed and do not own or rent their own properties. From what I have seen, many of those responsible do (or did) have jobs. Essentially what Cameron is doing is trying to punish those without work twice – once in the courts and then again by denying them welfare. He doesn’t of course wonder why people were out on the streets in the first place. He doesn’t of course consider where families who are evicted are supposed to live or how they feed themselves. He doesn’t consider this because it is a safe assumption that none of them involved will vote Tory.

Very cleverly Tories try and build public opinion against certain sectors of society. It’s the Homer Simpson mentality of “identify the weakest kid in the playground and steal his lunch money because he can’t fight back”.

So, Tories do what Tories do. They are looking at relieving the tax burden on the rich by reducing the 50p tax rate. He makes glib promises about tax evasion, but its only words. He continues to fund the bombing of unfriendly oil rich states; yet ignores Zimbabwe and North Korea. His Chancellor makes announcements that will put a million people out of work and then they both scratch their heads at rising unemployment figures. They ignore the chronic youth unemployment rates. They steal public sector pensions to cover up the mess their mates in the banking industry made.

Don’t be surprised at any of this. It’s what Tories do!

That is why the Trade Union movement are fighting back. That is why we take to streets to protest against Tory austerity policies, that is why we take industrial action to protect our public services.

PANIC

So, London burned. It was always going to happen. Nick Clegg himself predicted that if the Tories came to power there would be riots. For once he was right. However, that didn’t stop jumping into bed with David Cameron at the first opportunity.

A lot will be said about the riots. Many will dismiss them as mindless acts of violence and greed by the younger generation. In some cases this will be true, but to write the whole thing off in such a glib manner is akin to an ostrich putting its head in the sand and hoping it goes away.

What is obvious is that the country is in a mess. The riots deflected attention from the crippling economic state across Europe and the USA. They deflected attention from Hackingate and the corruptness in the media, Police and Government. These are important issues, and to a certain degree played a part in what happened in the past week.

We have a police force, especially in London, that is being subjected to serious allegations. The police, whether you like them or not, are there to keep law and order. They must be above suspicion. Currently they are not. The shooting of a man in Tottenham raises serious questions about the use of firearms, and specifically, which sectors of society they are used against. IPCC investigations now show that no shots were fired by the victim.

We have a Parliament that has seen its own members imprisoned for expenses fraud. Hardly sets the example for the rest of us does it? A Government that is hell bent on protecting its own whilst the working classes struggle to make ends meet as jobs, services and pay are slashed. I don’t know how much the riots in London will cost in compensation or insurance, but I would be interested to compare that to the amount of bonuses the bankers have been paid in the last two years.

And then we have a media, which has long been regarded with suspicion by those who understand the infotainment they provide is not worth the paper it’s written on. But now, the truth is coming out about bribing police and hacking phones.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that those who took to the streets were right to do so. I’ve no problem with direct action, but what we saw was not political in the strictest terms. A political demonstration would have hit the banks and the tax avoiders. It didn’t. These riots in the main destroyed working class residential areas, small businesses (who face a tough enough task competing with Tescos et al) and involved the indiscriminate beatings of those unfortunate to be passing by. In fact those at the forefront of this are the very people we should be trying to protect.

Am I the only one worried by noises coming out of Government? Firstly, it is not, and never can be, the job of the Government to tell the Judiciary what to do. Cameron et al call for harsh sentences. It is the job of the judges to decide what punishment, if any, is meted out. Do you not show some concern that people are being held in custody for stealing small value items? This is especially true when some who commit far more serious crimes, such as assault, are easily bailed and there are many cases of shoplifting that don’t even get to court?
Were you not concerned that the policing seemed to involve chasing groups of rioters for a few hundred yards and then stopping. The net effect was to simply allow them to continue their violence somewhere further down the road – usually ending up in residential areas. This is a complete contrast to peaceful political demonstrations when the police box you in so you cannot move.

Were you not concerned that the Police were unable to cope with this. What will it be like in years to come when the cuts have bitten and there are far fewer police on the streets?

And, are you not concerned at the knee jerk reaction to all this? An e-petition has gained more than 100000 signatures demanding that rioters lose their benefits. There is one huge assumption in that. It assumes that the rioters were all unemployed. I have not heard anyone stand up and forcibly correct this. And it needs correcting. It is quite clear from the news reports that many people involved are in employment. Are the Great British public suggesting we should have a two tier legal system where those out of work are punished twice, whilst those in work are punished just the once. Are we allowing the unemployed to be further demonised?

Cameron suggests the lack of father figures is an issue. The Tories seem once again to be blaming the ills of the country onto one of the most repressed social groups - the single mother. You’ll note he doesn’t suggest the lack of mother figure may be factor. Nor does he understand (because he is a Tory) that a great many single parent families work perfectly well and in many cases better than traditional families.

The most worrying thing is that Cameron himself seems to be supporting those individuals who decided to protect their streets. The moment you give vigilante groups the green light, you end up with a worse scenario than you started with. There are very strong suggestions that the far right EDL were behind many of these groups, and in at least one case they started to fight with the police. Some of you may have noticed that on Monday night the EDL were openly blaming Muslims for the troubles, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

As Britain clears up the mess, we are waking up to a new society. Hopefully communities will unite across ethnic lines and finally come to the conclusion that we are all in this together. Sadly for Cameron, that wont be his version of that phrase. We must avoid apportioning blame to any sector of society. The troubles were not based on race, were not based on class, were not based on social background, were not based on political ideals and were not restricted to any age group.

The blame lies solely with a society that simply doesn’t give a damn, doesn’t think for itself and refuses to question itself.