Paul Holleran: Scots NUJchief on why we need avibrant, diverse media

• see page 8£1 • issue 478 • 27th May – 9th June 2016scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com

Spain elections: new leftalliance deeply concernsthe establishment

• see pages 10&11

/ScottishSocialistVoiceScottishSocialistVoice.wordpress.com @ssv_voice

History repeats itself ‘first as tragedy, then as farce’

- KARL MARX

A TALE OF TWO REFERENDUMS

Euroref Farce #2 –feuding Tories lock horns

Indyref Tragedy #1 –won by Project Fear

• Reject UKIP and the Union Jack Tories...

• Only a real left alternative can deliver real change

• vote Remain – FIGHT FOR A SOCIALIST EUROPE• fight racism – REFUGEES WELCOME HERE• people before profit – END AUSTERITY

NEWS

2 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • issue 478

To subscribe, see: scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com or fill in this formand send it to: SSV, Suite 370, Central Chambers, 93 Hope St, GlasgowG2 6LD. Phone: 07810205747. Cheques payable to ‘Scottish Socialist Voice’

Name...........................................................................................Address...........................................................................................................................................................................................Phone.........................................................................................Email...........................................................................................g £5 for 2 issues g £10 for 4 issues g £20 for 8 issues

subscriptionsJoin the SSPFill in this form and send it to: Scottish Socialist Party, Suite 370, 4th Floor, Central Chambers, 93 Hope St, Glasgow G2 6LD. Or phone:07810205747. Or join the SSP online: scottishsocialistparty.org/join-usg I would like to join the Scottish Socialist Partyg I would like more info on the Scottish Socialist PartyName........................................................................................Address...........................................................................................................................................................................................Phone.........................................................................................Email...........................................................................................

VETERAN SOCIALIST film director Ken Loach has won theprestigious Palme d’Or award at the Cannes Film Festival with afilm which exposes the brutal inhumanity behind the benefitsanctions at the heart of the Tory assault on claimants and the poor.

I, Daniel Blake which centres on a carpenter who, throughillness, cannot follow his trade and comes face to face with thepunitive benefits system, blows away the disgusting propagandaof programmes such as Benefits Street and the heartlesscynicism of well-fed Etonians’ fake “all in it together” lies. Speaking to the Morning Star after the announcement, actor Kate

Rutter, who plays a benefits clerk reprimanded for trying to helpBlake, called for a united response from both claimants and jobcentre staff against Tory brutality. As the Voice went to press, PCS(the main union involved) annual conference in Brighton was dueto debate calls to “intensify” action against the benefits regime.

New Ken Loach film wins Palme d’Or

KEN LOACH: ‘When there is despair, the people from the far right takeadvantage. We must say that another world is possible and necessary.’

EDITORIAL

issue 478 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • 3

by Ken Ferguson

THE NARROW defeat inflicted on farright Austrian presidential candidate Nor-bert Hofer by Green pro-EU Alexander Vander Bellen represents both a close call fordemocrats across the continent and a starkwarning of the dangers that lie ahead. Here in the Voice, we have consistently

warned of the rising tide of far right racistparties across the continent, and morewidely of the danger that the endless grindof austerity will spread despair, disillusionand, in the absence of a progressive alter-native, boost the populist right. This is happening from Finland in the

North to Greece in the South, and thegrowth of xenophobes like UKIP, and theemboldening of the anti-immigration righthere in the UK, are part of that process. Underpinning this danger is the combi-

nation of hard line austerity, frozenwages, service cuts and insecure workalongside a meek acceptance of theseproblems by mainstream politicians ofboth Tory and Labour governments. In Scotland, while the recent boost of

the Tories at Holyrood was to a large ex-tent a reflection of a consolidation of Novoters and a highly personalised cam-paign around Ruth Davidson, it does notmean that they don’t support austerity.

Project Fear-style scaresThe exclusion of Cameron from the Tory

campaign was simply tactical, as was thereplacement of hard policy discussion withsoft photo calls and the Tory pledge to bean effective opposition will now see the re-ality of Tory pressure—boosted by alargely Tory press—challenging the SNP. This right wing brew is likely to be given

impetus by the increasingly toxic, quasi-racist atmosphere flowing from the evermore ‘project fear’-style scares peddled byboth of the main EU referendum cam-paigns. Across the UK, there is now a realdanger that a Brexit vote could happenand that it would in turn put the hard rightat the helm at Westminster, which is whymany on the left such as the SSP havesupported a remain vote while demandingsocial change within the EU. Of coursedespite some of her new MSPs backing

Brexit, the Tory leader is a Cameron loy-alist on the issue and while the prospectof his defeat is at the outer edge of David-son’s calculations, this does not mean thatshe is anything but a pro-austerity Tory. In her ambitions, Ms Davidson can

surely rely on the full blooded support of ashrilly vocal Tory press cock-a-hoop at theapparent return of their favourites from thepariah status that the shadow of Thatchercast them into. The danger is that thisoverblown rhetoric allied to the near deathof Labour leaves the field open to a tartanversion of austerity and neoliberalismwhich moves the centre of gravity of policyin a right wing direction. This may seemfanciful given the current SNP dominancebut given that the Sturgeon governmentare set both on parking indyref2 and inconcentrating on proving their compe-tence in government vulnerability looms. Questions are already emerging around

claims about a major business deal with aChinese firm, hard choices on fracking,and of course the so called “love triangle”scandal are early examples, and given itsfull spectrum dominance of Scottish poli-tics, the question must be—can it last?One obvious flashpoint could be educa-

tion, where that phrase “the attainmentgap” and the high profile move of JohnSwinney to tackle it could quickly becomean albatross around the SNP’s neck. Davidson has already raised demands

for parent-run schools and many see thegovernment adoption of school testing as

the thin end of wedge leading down theEnglish road with weakened council con-trol of education, opening the way to thenightmare that has seen English parentsstrikes over testing pressure on kids. It is also hard to see how the famous

“gap” can be closed in a climate ofpoverty, low pay and cuts which impacthardest precisely on the working classkids and communities who are its victims. Real action on pay going well beyond the

largely gesture politics of fake “living wages”and delivery of skilled jobs, on housing andan end to the demonising of the poor andvulnerable are vital to creating the fairer so-ciety in which people can flourish.

Real alternative still vitalIn this climate, the need for a real alter-

native to the fuzzy self-described socialdemocracy of the SNP—an approach inretreat across Europe—is still vital. The fact that the pro-independence left

was squeezed on 5 May simply adds ur-gency to the task of winning the public ar-gument on the real issues facing workingclass Scotland which are in turn essentialif the engagement and energy of the Yescampaign is to recaptured. There is no alternative to this hard slog

of work in communities, unions and incampaigns on poverty, against austerityand to protect the environment on issuessuch as fracking, if the alternative worldwhich puts people and planet, so vital tothe vast majority, is to be won.

Only a left alternativecan halt the populist right

AUSTRIA'S CLOSE CALL: Greenpro-EU Alexander Van der Bellen(left) has become Austrian presidentafter narrowly defeating far rightcandidate Norbert Hofer (right)

OPINION

4 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • issue 478

by Roz Paterson

MANY MOONS ago, a fella came up tome at an SSP stall, examined our FreeSchool Meals leaflet, and said, “Aye, youdo very well, I like this campaign, butyou’re too syndicalist for my tastes.” And you know what? I didn’t even botherlooking up “syndicalist” in my ‘Big Dic-tionary of Long Words Used by MaleMarxists when Talking to Ladies’. I just didn’t bother, folks. I just thought,“What a waste of a reasonably intelligenthuman being. All his political principlescome to nothing, as they prevent him fromhaving any impact, and serve only to keephim isolated.” Or maybe it was just, “Whata tube!”; I forget which. The point is, if you insist on political purity,you’re going to be on your own, and no onewill care very much. The difference betweenone left-winger and another is a moot pointin the grand scheme of things, and highlight-ing our differences only diminishes us. What made the SSP so different from theleft-wing political parties that preceded it, wasthat it overcame the splitist mentality. The ideabeing that, if we could agree on 80 per cent ofour political ideas, it was good enough to begoing on with. The other 20 per cent, well,we’d cross that bridge when we came to it.

Energy and optimismThis (brief) uniting of the left, harnessed tothe energy and optimism unleashed by the es-tablishment of the Scottish Parliament, for allits flaws, and a new voting system that allowedsmaller parties representation, plus the SSP’spragmatic approach to policy-making, led tothe biggest breakthrough of a socialist party inall of Europe. With six MSPs elected in 2003,our European comrades were watching. Once in parliament, the SSP continuedwith the work that had made us our name;street-level campaigns that reached out toother, including non-political, organisa-tions, such as the Free School Meals cam-paign, which garnered support fromanti-poverty groups, health professionals,food campaigners, educationalists, as wellas other political parties...and while the SSPbill failed in parliament, the idea stuck,leading to the provision of free schoolmeals for all children in Primaries 1-3. Ditto our campaign to abolish prescrip-tion charges, which came into law under theSNP government.

On our own, we hadn’t the heft. With likeminds, we were unstoppable. Alas, a decade of internal turmoil later,the SSP’s electoral progress has beenchecked, which only goes to prove thepoint; united action is effective action. The Yes campaign showed this again tobe the case, raising support for independ-ence from the doldrums of the 20s, towithin a whisker of majority. That didn’thappen through lots of little Yes groups allarguing that they were different from all theother little Yes groups because they werenot, for instance, at all “syndicalist”. Unfortunately, since 19 September 2014,what has been noticeable is the space openingup between the parties that stood shoulder-to-shoulder throughout the campaign, and Idon’t mean the Tories and the Labour Party. Almost before the Yes placards were inthe gutter, the pro-independence movementseemed to have dissolved into its con-stituent parts, leaving the SNP in a positionwhere it is all but in charge of Scotland’sdestiny. Which is not good for democracy,and not good for independence. We need to recognise our common causewith, for instance, the Greens, both in thecause of independence, and the environ-ment. There is so much that we agree on,from Scottish sovereignty, to sustainableenergy, to social justice. On issues likefracking, Trident, the ship-to-ship oil trans-fers in the Moray Firth, nothing dividesus—except our political identity. How much stronger and more influentialwould we be, if we worked together? The Greens, riding high with six MSPs,may not think they need the left, but theydo. For one, the Greens will always struggle

to penetrate beyond a middle-class vote; thepersistent association with recumbent bikesand farmers’ markets will always make ithard for them to make breakthroughs inareas of acute poverty and social exclusion. Second, the Greens have no real con-stituency, they remain an add-on vote, sec-ond to Tory, Labour, SNP and Lib Demallegiances, and this is unlikely to change,because environmental policies remain, inmost people’s eyes, secondary to fiscal andsocial issues. This shouldn’t be the case, ofcourse. If we don’t address climate change,then our fiscal and social policies will be somany deck chairs on the Titanic.

Radical, sustained changeThe Greens have done well, electorally, butthey have so far failed to make these issues ur-gent to the average person, to link environ-mental degradation with poverty ofexperience, loss of livelihood, poor health andnarrowing futures. And failed to underscorethe fact that, if we are to alter our course, thingscannot stay as they are. A few green tweakswon’t save the planet; only radical, sustainedchange can do it, including an end to the cap-italist model of increasing economic growth. The left, as demonstrated by the SSP, aregood at street-level, intelligent campaigns,that address real social issues, and lead togenuine political action. We’re alsoswitched on to the need for change. The reds and greens should not be in con-flict, but supporting each other in our bid tomake another Scotland possible. Billy Bragg once described the dilemmaof whether to vote “red for my class, or greenfor my children.” Well, time has turned thepage, and we need to be able to do both.

United action is effective action

REDS & GREENS:we should be

supporting eachother in our bid to

make anotherScotland possible

COLIN FOX

issue 478 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • 5

by Colin Fox, SSP nationalco-spokesperson

IF THE polls are correct, the‘Remain’ side’s lead in the EUreferendum is growing. If sothis is a curious outcome be-cause the UK Government’scase is in many ways a poorone. Telephone polls give Re-main an 8-12 per cent leadand the bookmakers (often amore reliable guide to votingintentions) now offer odds of1/6 on a Remain vote with‘Leave’ out to 4/1. These fig-ures suggest the case for con-tinued EU membership hasnot been successfully rebuttedby the ‘Brexiteers’. One example of how inef-

fective the Leave camp hasbeen was seen when TUCGeneral Secretary FrancesO’Grady claimed equal pay,holiday pay, maternity rights,and trade union protectionwere all won thanks toBritain’s EU membership. This is of course nonsense.

Political actionThese reforms were won as

a result of political action byworking people not Brusselsbenevolence. The Equal PayAct for example emerged froma strike by working classwomen sewing machinists atThe Ford Motor Company in1970 (portrayed in the filmMade in Dagenham) beforeBritain even joined the Com-mon Market as it was then. But then the left arguments

are not prominent in Leavepropaganda. That message isdominated by those well-knowntrade unionists Boris Johnstonand Michael Gove. Neither hasthe left exploited the Tory Gov-ernment’s appalling threat con-tained in a leaflet issued toevery household, promising‘tough new restrictions on ac-cess to our welfare system fornew EU migrants’.

‘Project Fear III’—the strat-egy employed by Cameron—isaimed at scaring the electorateabout their economic prospectsand the ‘unknown conse-quences’ of leaving the EUafter 40 years. That this tacticappears to be working again isa depressing conclusion for itundoubtedly succeeded for theNo side in September 2014and for Cameron in the 2015General Election. This referendum has be-

come, as most predicted itwould, essentially a conflictbetween two wings of the ToryParty. Commentators refer to itas ‘Blue on Blue’ in referenceto US military language usedin Iraq and Afghanistan to de-scribe conflicts where soldiersfrom their own side kill one an-other. The left for its part havebeen marginalised in this de-bate. Despite broad agreementthat the EU is an anti-democra-tic bosses club neither ‘LeftLeave’ nor ‘Left Remainers’can be said to be influencingthe debate very much.Nonetheless the question thatdivides us is can the EU befundamentally changed? “It’s impossible for the EU to

be a democracy,” insisted theformer BBC and Channel FourEconomics commentator Paul

Mason on Question Time lastweek. “The EU is disintegrat-ing,” he added, “most east Eu-ropean governments are farright.” He “will not be votingBrexit,” he told us, because“that would give UKIP and theextreme right of the Tory Partywhat they want.” The ‘Left Leave’ camp ac-

cuse him of ‘milking the cowand kicking over the bucket’,reaching a conclusion at oddswith his views on the nature ofthe EU. But they are them-selves in danger of abstractthinking divorced from the realworld. Left Leavers infer Brexitin and of itself offers a pro-gressive alternative. The EU, they point out, is in

the grip of a neoliberal corpo-rate elite but they omit to men-tion Britain is too. They suggestthe EU has been responsiblefor privatising Britain’s utilitiesthese past 40 years, ignoringthe fact that it was the Thatchergovernment that stoked theprocess worldwide. The Scottish Socialist Party

believes Britain should remainin the EU as it is the lesser ofthe two evils on offer on 23June. We want to see a social-ist Europe and insist workingpeople and their political or-ganisations across the EU

must roll up our collectivesleeves and act together to de-mocratise it. We need to getthe EU to work on behalf of the99 per cent not the corporateelite who make up the 1 percent. No one is suggesting thatis an easy task. But it remainscentral. So how do we do that? The EU has been changed

over and over again by variousTreaties during its lifetime. By and large these changes

have been driven by the corpo-rations and the right. Workingpeople across Europe musttherefore be prepared to strug-gle for democratic reforms.That is where democraticchange must come from. Wemust develop far greater politi-cal co-ordination across the left.

InternationalismThat spirit of internationalism

is behind my visit to Madrid atthe end of June to observe theSpanish general election at theinvitation of Podemos. My aim is to strengthen the

links between the SSP andPodemos in the same way I didin 2015 when I went to Athensfor the Greek general electionat the invitation of Syriza. Agreat deal of water has goneunder the bridge since then ofcourse in Greece but the ben-efit for the SSP was invaluable.

New project fear is blue on blue

EDINBURGHPEOPLE’S FESTIVALPUBLIC DEBATE

‘What should the EUlook like, and how do

we achieve that?’Wed 8 June at 7pm The Grassmarket Centre,

Candlemaker Row,EDINBURGH

with Jim Sillars for ‘Leave’, Alison Johnstone MSP

for ‘Remain’, and Neil Findlay MSP

All welcome

BUFFOON BORIS:this referendum hasbecome a conflictbetween two wingsof the Tory Party

WORKPLACE

6 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • issue 478

by Richie Venton, SSP nationalworkplace organiser

STRIKES WORK! Workers don’t walkout the door at the drop of a hat or on a whim,but when they’re driven to the last resort ofstrikes in defence of their jobs, conditions andpublic services they provide, swift united ac-tion can often turn the most ruthless employ-ers or hard nosed governments. Recently in Scotland, several groups of

workers have been compelled to ‘downtools’, as employers turn the screw in pursuitof cuts to the share of wealth going to theworking class. And where determined, astuteleadership is provided, workers have showntheir willingness to fight back, often winningvictories for wider society in the process. One outstanding recent example was the

outright victory for the Scottish Further Ed-ucation college lecturers—organised inEIS-FELA—who planned 32 strikes intheir long-running battle for equal pay, toend the criminal £10,000 pay gap betweenstaff in different colleges or different townsdoing exactly the same teaching job. Within hours of the first day’s solid strike,

the employers caved in entirely, even to theextent of paying the 4,000 strikers for the daythey had hit the streets and joined picket lines!

CalMac victoryThe fact the negotiating team were them-

selves lecturers was one key factor in win-ning, as they didn’t just cave in like too manyhighly-paid union full-time officials often do. Timing was key as the SNP government

faced a potential electoral nightmare asstrikes were set to straddle the Scottish par-liament elections. So they intervened to endyears of foot-dragging on equal pay andfunded the settlement that means pay risesof up to 25 per cent for some. United, determined strike action ended

years of failure to establish national paybargaining and equal pay under successiveLabour-Lib Dem and SNP governments. More recent, and even more significant,

is the victory for the ferry workers’unions—in particular the RMT—in keep-ing the west coast ferries in the hands of thepublic sector: CalMac. A lot of camouflage has been thrown over

this issue by the SNP leadership and some oftheir more zealous and uncritical followers—

including denials that the SNP ever consideredhanding this lifeline service to the profiteeringSerco. Likewise a lot of false claims for credithave been lodged by Scottish Labour MSPs. So what really happened? Back in 2006,

the then Labour-Lib Dem coalition put theClyde and Hebrides ferries out to tender,using the excuse that they were legallyforced to do so under EU regulations. That claim has been exposed as bunkum,

because under EU directives and rulings—including the Teckel Exemption—the gov-ernment can keep services under publicownership on social and economic grounds.The same excuse was equally bunkum whenit was warmed up and served by the SNPgovernment in 2012, when they actually pri-vatised the Northlink ferries—and subsidisedthe profit margins of Serco ever since. And likewise over the past two years, as

the SNP put the west coast ferries out totender, with Serco and CalMac emerging asthe two competitors for the £900millioncontract from 2016-24. The employers and government refused to

guarantee the jobs, conditions, pension rightsand ferry services as the tender processdragged on. It took determined strikes byRMT members a year ago to force the SNPgovernment to eventually concede promiseson these issues—and to waken up to the po-litical consequences of privatisation. But still they refused to abandon the

costly, unnecessary tendering, despite in-depth research commissioned by the RMTshowing the irrefutable economic and so-cial advantages of public ownership. Both Nicola Sturgeon and Transport Sec-

retary Derek McKay repeatedly trotted outthe line that even if Serco won the bid “itwill remain a public service”. This cynicalwordplay couldn’t disguise the fact it wouldmean Serco raking in profit—on the basis ofgovernment subsidies of £110-120million ayear for every one of the next eight years. The persistent, high profile campaigning

by the RMT and their allies—including theSSP—over the past year has hoisted theissue into public awareness. Picket lines, protests outside the parlia-

ment, a postcard campaign targeting MSPs,and silent protests as Nicola Sturgeon ad-dressed the STUC congress—all these andmore pounded the SNP government to‘Keep CalMac Public’.

Post-election, they would have had torely on the Tories to push through privati-sation (Serco) as Labour seized the oppor-tunity to embarrass the SNP—despiteLabour’s own baleful, shameful record onprivatisation of transport services while ingovernment at both Scottish and UK levels. The SNP resisted demands by the RMT

and their allies for the result of the tenderto be announced pre-election, to allow theScottish people to pass judgement. As the announcement loomed at the end

of May, the RMT stepped up the pressure,calling a demo outside parliament on 19May. As RMT activists, SSP members andother trade unionists converged on Holy-rood, Nicola Sturgeon headed off toArdrossan harbour to announce CalMac hadwon the contract. A hugely welcome result. Despite the government’s ploys to disguise

the reasons, this was clearly an outstanding,clear-cut victory for ferry workers throughtheir union’s determined campaigning andstrike action, aided by those who showedthem solidarity throughout. It certainlywasn’t just the benign gift of a government! As one of the RMT leaders of the CalMac

battle told me at the celebratory lobby of theparliament on 19 May, “Make no mistake,this is a victory for the solidarity of workersand our supporters, like yourselves. With-out that Serco shareholders would today becelebrating. We should celebrate this vic-tory today, and then move on to the next bigbattles, which includes the process for the2018 Northlink ferries contract.”

Keep guards on trainsHaving won this outstanding victory for

workers and island communities dependenton the lifeline ferries, the RMT now face abattle to stop the extension of Driver OnlyOperation trains. This is a criminal attack on basic safety for

staff and passengers on Abellio’s ScotRailservices, and must he stopped in its tracks be-fore more people die or are seriously injured,like the passenger crushed and dragged ontothe tracks recently in East Dunbartonshire. And trade unionists, regardless of how

they recently voted in the Scottish elections,should unite in demanding that there is norepeat of the SNP government’s actions afew years ago, when they aided and abettedFirst ScotRail bosses in defeating the RMT

Workers strike

WORKPLACE

issue 478 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • 7

members’ strike against Driver Only Oper-ations on the Airdrie-Bathgate line. At that time, we exposed in the Voice how

Alex Salmond’s government pledged to un-derwrite First Group for any losses caused bystrikes—thereby encouraging strikebreakingand an assault on safety by offering state sub-sidies to the enemies of the rail unions. At more localised level, other groups of

workers have won concessions from axe-wielding councils by turning their opposi-tion into action—including strike action. Teachers in Labour-run West Dunbarton-

shire Council have won a battle against ed-ucationally detrimental attacks on schoolorganisation. They staged months of strikes,in the teeth of malicious attempts by theLabour council to incite opposition to theEIS members from parents—and defeatedplans to abolish subject teachers being incharge of departments, which would haveundermined kids’ education. In Glasgow City Council, a small group of

CCTV workers recently won big improve-ments on pay after successive strikes demand-ing equal allowances with other equivalentjobs in Cordia, one of the city council’s arms-length offshoots. School jannies are still bat-tling against a Council hellbent on deprivingthese workers of thousands of pounds in al-lowances for the dirty jobs they do.

The Glasgow Labour administrationagreed £131million cuts over two years,equivalent to 3,000 job losses. Their plannedattacks include loss of three public holidaysto existing and future staff, cuts to the abilityof staff to get time off in lieu after workingmassive numbers of unpaid hours, and lossof annual leave for new recruits. The Unison branch recently held a con-

sultative ballot for industrial action—in-cluding strikes—to stop this butchery ofconditions, coming on top of the slaughterof 4-5,000 jobs and vastly increased work-load imposed since 2010.

Prepare union strugglesMembers have voted by clear majorities

for action—including by 88 per cent forstrikes amongst the sections of workersmost directly threatened. In response, the council has abandoned its

plans to slash existing workers’ public holi-days, but are wanting to forge ahead with therest of the cuts, hoping to divide and conquerby this concession. The Glasgow City Unisonbranch is seeking endorsement of a ballot foraction from the union’s Scottish leadership,rightly calling for unity against all cuts. Whether at local council or Scottish public

services level, workers and the communitiesthat depend on them face harsh attacks as the

marauding Tories in Westminster gain suc-cour from their alleged revival in Scotland. This is where the response of both

Labour and SNP councillors and MSPs areall too similar, contrary to the tribal dividebetween the two parties. With honourableexceptions, they huff and puff about Tory-imposed cuts... and then implement them. They are prisoners of their own pro-cap-

italist ideology, lacking any vision of an en-tirely different system of society, evenwhen they don the mantle of being ‘socialdemocrats’—essentially, wishing for a nicerversion of capitalist profiteering! The same approach applies to their fail-

ure to defy anti-worker privatisation de-mands from EU bureaucrats—even whenthose demands actually exist! Workers and socialists need to prepare

for battles ahead—and gain lessons and en-couragement from the growing number ofcases where workers in struggle have wonconcessions and even spectacular victories. There’s an urgent need to build coordinated

workers’ resistance with a vision of a Scotlandwhere the wealth of the fourteenth-richest na-tion on earth is invested in decent wages, guar-anteed high-value jobs, and expanded publicservices, rather than being devoted to the plun-der of the working class and the environmentfor the profit of a minuscule minority.

back – and win!WE WILL WIN: a small group of CCTVworkers recently won big improvementson pay from Glasgow City Council aftersuccessive strike actions

MEDIA

8 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • issue 478

by Paul Holleran, Scottish OrganiserNational Union of Journalists

A MAJOR measure of any functioningdemocracy is the state of its media and any-one looking closely at the newspaper andbroadcasting industry in this country wouldbe rightly concerned about the current po-sition of the fourth estate in particular. Despite the efforts of the Scottish News-

paper Society to talk up the industry andminimise the facts about the downward spi-ral of sales and advertising revenues, wecontinue to see job cuts impacting on jour-nalism across the country. There are less than half the number of

journalists in newsrooms of the Scottish in-digenous broadsheets compared to ten yearsago, while daily tabloids have also sufferedfrom budgets being slashed. And at thistime, only weeks after the Scottish parlia-mentary elections, many local newspaperoffices around Scotland are the focus of dis-putes and industrial action ballots as mem-bers fight for better staffing levels and toprotect hard won terms and conditions. Amazingly as redundancies are decimat-

ing journalist posts, Newsquest MediaGroup are trying to cut sick pay entitlementand impose an extra two and half hours aweek, while reducing holidays too.

Job cutsThe Johnston Press experiment known as

“Newsroom of the Future” has cut dozensof jobs and union members this week haverefused to accept the newly establishedstaffing levels as being unsustainable. Unsustainable for the reasons of their

health and safety, because of the increasedstress of dealing with newly set workloadsfor each individual. The other stressor forjournalists is the negative impact on the localidentity of the titles because of the use ofmuch more generic feature copy used acrossmany titles to help compensate for lost jobs. The refusal of companies like Newsquest to

absorb falling profits without slashing budgetsis leading to the demise of great Scottish titlessuch as The Herald and its sister titles. Hopefully the management regime at

Newsquest in Scotland will be successful ingrowing advertising and circulation rev-enues as they did in running Clyde & Forth

Publishing in recent years. However theirLondon bosses appear more keen to followin the footsteps of their US parent companyGannett and cut jobs rather than pursuegrowth to meet budgets. Let’s be blunt, the positivity being pushed

by the SNS and employers is correct in that thepapers are still very profitable for their owners,but not pulling in as much dosh as they usedto. That is may be the crux of the matter. Howmuch money do papers have to make to en-courage publishers to keep them alive? At a public meeting a couple of years ago

in Glasgow, organised by the NUJ and Co-Operative movement, the importance ofpress ownership was discussed. Paul WoodManaging Director at The West HighlandFree Press told the captive audience that hiscompany set a minimum target of 1 per centprofit per annum. Their view was that theirtitle was a community asset, a cornerstone oftheir local democracy and not just about coin. The NUJ Scottish Executive Council will

be placing this issue firmly on it’s agendafor the next few years, with a view to ex-ploring different models for press owner-ship and development in this country. We have recently engaged with Robert Mc-

Chesney, an American professor who spe-cialises in the history and political economy ofcommunication and the role the media playsin democratic and capitalist societies. Furtherdiscussion is planned with this founder of FreePress, a US media reform organisation andsupporter of community owned media. A real enigma facing the industry which is

also having a major impact on staff, is the de-mand to not only to fill the pages of the printcopies but the online editions of each title. The inability of most publishers to estab-

lish an alternative and comparable revenueline by this route is a tragedy which is furtherundermining the industry. A lack of innova-tive ideas to attract advertisers and morereaders has plagued print media despitemuch effort but not enough smart thinking. The additional workload is obviously an-

other obstacle facing journalists trying toproduce the best product every day andweek with a diminishing pool of resources. It is clear that the numbers of journalists in

each newsroom cannot be reduced any furtherwithout causing very serious damage to thesubstance of the titles and the health of staff.

The very existence of some local news-papers is at risk and steps need to be takenat government level to put in place mecha-nisms to protect all titles from closure. It remains to be seen if there is anything

resembling a considerable impact for printmedia through the recent announcement inthe Westminster White Paper on BBC Char-ter Renewal. Certainly there could be oppor-tunities for young people taking on ModernApprenticeships ni partnership between localpapers and BBC stations. However staffworking at BBC Scotland are more inter-ested in how much extra resources will beprovided as part of the licence fee agreement. The NUJ submitted proposals putting for-

ward arguments for an expanded news serviceacross Scotland, including a new radio stationto supplement Radio Scotland. The injectionof money would lead to growth in news andcurrent affairs, but also increased drama andmusic from Scottish writers and artistes.

Pathetic settlementThe boost to Scottish culture and entertain-

ments industries would be invaluable onmany fronts, with a “made in Scotland”stamp on the new productions. However fol-lowing another pathetic licence fee settlementnegotiated between Westminster and BBCsenior people, we were told “the Nations andregions will be getting nothing extra”. Fortunately the Scottish Government, in

partnership with Welsh and Northern Irishpoliticians lobbied ferociously for a betterdeal. We now wait in hope and expectationfor the details of that new investment. An expansion of journalistic jobs across

BBC Scotland and a possible “Scottish Six”providing a new perspective on news andcurrent affairs would be a great boost. Although the amount of investment will

not be anywhere need what was on the shop-ping list it will be a shot in the arm for a be-leaguered industry. Broadcasting in Scotlandshould continue to be in a reasonably healthycondition particularly if STV plough on withtheir steady growth, developing further withstability and innovation the keywords. There is still a lot of quality in the Scottish

media but it is being undermined, thereby re-ducing the ability to make profits, and ofcourse substantial amounts of those profitsshould be reinvested in a qualitative fashion.

Scottish democracy needsa vibrant, diverse media

WORKPLACE

issue 478 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • 9

by a ScotRail driver

THE RMT union is balloting its ScotRailconductor members over Abellio’s refusalto rule out the extension of Driver Only Op-eration (DOO) on services currently workedby on-train conductors (guards). At the mo-ment around 44 per cent of ScotRail trainsoperate with DOO, the rest with conductors. There are crucial differences between

these two ways of operating trains, withdangerous implications for passengers ifDOO is imposed. Firstly, conductors are safety critical. In

addition to revenue duties, they are trainedin personal track safety and emergency pro-cedures, including evacuating a train, tak-ing charge of a situation where the driverhas become incapacitated, operate thewheelchair ramp and are in sole charge ofopening and closing the train doors. Thesetrains cannot enter passenger service with-out a conductor. The second member of staff on a DOO

train is the ticket examiner. They perform thesame revenue duties as a conductor, and havean important customer service role. Theyhave no safety role but do operate the wheel-chair ramp at unmanned stations. DOO trainscan, and often do, run in passenger servicewithout a ticket examiner on board. But as long as someone opens and closes

the doors, checks your ticket and points youin the right direction, what’s the problem?The answer is that as long as nothing goeswrong there isn’t one. Unfortunately though,as in every other workplace, things can andoccasionally do go wrong, and on the rail-way the consequences of that can be tragic.

Safety benefitsReal-life incidents and scenarios make

abundantly clear the safety benefits of trainsusing conductors. A stop-short, whereby adriver mistakes the length of the train andstops at a point designated on the platformfor a shorter unit, thus leaving a portion ofthe train not on the platform, is one of a dri-ver’s most dreaded nightmares. They’re rare but do happen. In this situa-

tion a DOO driver has around a single sec-ond to notice his/her mistake beforereleasing the doors and potentially riskingthe lives of passengers who could fall fromthe train. On conductor operated trains it isthe job of the conductor to step onto theplatform and ensure the train is correctly

positioned on it before opening the generaldoors, greatly mitigating this risk. Rarer still, but again it does happen, are

the occasions when a DOO driver has acci-dentally released the doors on the wrongside of the train, the non-platform side. In aperfect storm scenario, if this happened ona packed train which was full and standingwith bodies unwittingly pressed against theinternal ‘Door Open’ buttons on the non-platform side, and a train was entering thatother platform (perhaps not even stoppingthere thus travelling at high speed), the con-sequences don’t bear thinking about. It’s no thanks to DOO that a serious acci-

dent has not yet happened in this way but thepotential remains for just such a deadly situa-tion, impossible with a conductor performinga platform check before releasing the doors.On 11 March a woman was sexually assaultedon the 2300 Glasgow Queen Street to AirdrieDOO service, a six-car train comprising twoseparate three-car units coupled together. DOO trains can and do run with no sec-

ond staff member on board, often on latenight weekend services as Train OperatingCompanies, when short-staffed and unableto cover all shifts, will change ticket exam-iners from late shift to early—purely in theinterests of revenue collection, or profit asit’s better known! It’s possible a ticket examiner was on that

particular train and working on the otherthree-car unit, leaving the unfortunate vic-

tim with no ScotRail staff member to callupon for assistance. Either way, this incident highlights a need

for increased, not reduced, staff presence,with a member of staff guaranteed on eachseparate unit a compulsory requirement ofTrain Operating Companies.

Vulnerable passengersDOO discriminates against vulnerable fe-

male passengers, but also against the dis-abled, specifically the wheelchair-bound. With drivers not allowed to use the on-

train ramp and no guarantee whatsoever ofa ticket examiner being on board, it’s downto sheer chance if such passengers get totravel at all should their local station be oneof the many which is unstaffed. Under DOO it’s a case of “Sorry, you’ll

have to get the next one, if there is one!”,something which happens relatively often.Again this alone should, in any decent so-ciety, make the case for the abolition ofDOO rather than its extension. DOO is not a modern system of operating

trains, regardless of any safety record com-panies may point to. Nor are the scenariosmentioned an exhaustive list of the prob-lems, some potentially fatal, that it poses. Itdiscriminates against the disabled, the vul-nerable, and is potentially lethal. The Scottish Socialist Party stands along-

side the RMT’s calls to “keep the guard on thetrain”. The ballot closes on Tuesday 7 June.

RMT: ‘keep the guard on the train’

ON GUARD: there aredangerous implicationsfor passengers if Driver

Only Operation is imposed

INTERNATIONAL

10 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • issue 478

by Dick Nichols, in Barcelona

FIVE MONTHS after the December 20 Spanish electionsfailed to produce a government, the country is again going tothe polls in the most polarised election since the end of theFranco dictatorship in the late 1970s. The December poll saw a surge in support for the radical

force Podemos and the various regional coalitions in which itparticipates. However, the final vote for these new forces—born of the last five years of social and national struggles—stillfell short of the score of the social-democratic Spanish SocialistWorkers Party (PSOE), by 20.66 per cent to 22.01 per cent.At the same time, the total vote to the left of the PSOE—

including the United Left (IU), the Basque left-nationalist EHBildu and the Catalan centre-left Republican Left of Catalonia(ERC)—was 27.59 per cent. Also, the overall left-versus-rightbalance was 52.4 per cent to 47.6 per cent (53.6 per cent to46.4 per cent if we exclude the Catalan nationalist right, whichwould support the formation of a left government in Spain ifguaranteed a Scottish-style referendum for Catalonia).With this result it was arithmetically possible to form a left

government of PSOE, Podemos and IU, provided theyreceived a minimum of support from Basque and Catalannationalist forces. But that was never going to happen: theleadership of the Spanish-centralist PSOE is as hostile toparticipating in a left government it doesn’t control as it is toacknowledging the right of self-determination of the nationsthat coexist in the Spanish state. After December 20, thePSOE leader Pedro Sánchez instead chose to negotiate aproposal for a “government of change” with the neoliberalparty Citizens. Its right-wing vision for Spain is as a “normal”European power purged of corruption, labour market“rigidities” and independence-seeking nationalities.

Left unityIn response, Podemos, its allies and IU voted down the

formation of a PSOE-Citizens administration—and wererewarded with virulent PSOE abuse for being “accomplices” ofthe ruling People’s Party (PP). For its part, the PP, still thelargest force with 28.72 per cent after December 20, was nevergoing to support a minority PSOE-Citizens administration thatremoved its hands from the levers of power.New elections then became inevitable, and by early May Spain

seemed set for a repeat of December 20. However, the refusal ofthe PSOE to negotiate in good faith with Podemos and IUfocussed the attention of these parties on their core challenge—that of overtaking the PSOE and confronting it with the choice oftaking part in a left government or becoming irrelevant.Negotiations between the Podemos and IU leaderships then

led to the proposal for a joint list in all those regions where thetwo parties had run separately in December. Their proposedticket, called United We Can, was endorsed by 98 per cent ofPodemos members and 84.5 per cent of IU members. The United We Can platform (“Changing Spain: 50 Steps for

Governing Together”) outlines a practical program of measuresaddressing the key problems of Spanish society. Its immediate

economic focus is boosted publicexpenditure focused on energysustainability, job creation and povertyreduction, to be funded through a war ontax evasion and by reducing the EuropeanUnion’s deficit reduction targets for Spain.Social reform measures include an end

to evictions, guaranteed access to waterand electricity and increased funding foreducation and health. Democratic reformscover a referendum for Catalonia, acitizen debate on constitutional reform(which would confront issues like themonarchy and NATO membership), and aone-vote-one-value electoral system.The platform includes comprehensive

proposals on ecological issues (in partreflecting the participation in the alliance ofthe green party Equo), and internationalproposals including a European debtconference, recognition of Palestine, self-determination for the Western Sahara andinternational aid at 0.7 per cent of GDP.The formation of United We Can has

produced deep concern in the Spanishestablishment. The average of opinionpolls taken from its formation up until May23 has the new coalition and its relatedalliances in second place at 24.1 per cent,as against the PSOE’s 20.8 per cent. Interms of seats, United We Can and thePSOE are neck-and-neck (due to Spain’s

UNITED WE CAN:left-wing electoralalliance UnidosPodemos, formed byPodemos, UnitedLeft, Equo and otherleft wing politicalparties, is contestingthe general electionin Spain

June 26 Spanish elections:

INTERNATIONAL

issue 478 • scottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com • 11

of empty shelves, of chemists where 200 people wait to buyaspirin, of communications media closed down, of businesspeople with their businesses expropriated, of citizens with theirsecond home expropriated.” He added that the “useful vote”on June 26 could only be for the PP so as to avoid Podemos“beating the PSOE and the PSOE having to support him[Iglesias] as prime minister, as it has done in the councilswhere they govern together, like Madrid and Barcelona.”Not to be outdone, Sánchez said on May 24 that the radical

formation had to explain the financing of an associatedfoundation that had supposedly received Venezuelan funding.He also required Iglesias to explain why he had called Basqueleft-nationalist leader Arnaldo Otegi a “political prisoner”.Sánchez had previously rejected a Podemos offer to run a

PSOE-IU-Podemos joint ticket for the Senate as a way ofbreaking the PP’s absolute majority in Spain’s upper house.The rise of United We Can has forced the three pro-

establishment parties into an anti-left sacred alliance. However,the risk they run is that United We Can’s able leaders, Iglesiasand IU’s Alberto Garzón, will be able to expose the underlyingmotivation of their fear campaign—to frustrate any change thatwould make Spain’s economic elites pay for improving the livesof the millions afflicted by the economic crisis.If United We Can’s campaign succeeds against this aggression

(and its activists mobilise as needed) the PSOE will have tochoose—grand coalition with the PP (and eventual politicaloblivion) or left government on terms set by United We Can.

• Dick Nichols is the European correspondent of Australia’sGreen Left Weekly and of Links—International Journal ofSocialist Renewal. A more detailed version of this article willsoon appear on its website

rigged system of unequal electorates).This situation holds before the electioncampaigning in which Podemos excelshas begun: in the December election,Podemos lifted its support from 15 percent to 20 per cent in last two weeksbefore polling day. The key variable willbe participation: the more people can beinspired to vote, the greater the supportfor the left. As a result, while the PP,PSOE and Citizens are each struggling todefend and extend their share of the vote,that fight is now constrained by the goal ofstopping United We Can—guaranteeing aslanderous, red-baiting electioncampaign. For starters, the connections,real and imagined, of Podemos leaderswith Venezuela’s Bolivarian governmentare once again being scoured by squadsof “investigative journalists” from themainstream media.On May 24, Citizens’ leader Albert

Rivera began his Spanish electioncampaign in the Venezuelan capitalCaracas as guest of the anti-Bolivarianmajority in the country’s nationalassembly! This majority also invitedPodemos leader Pablo Iglesias toappear before the assembly and explainhis links with Bolivarianism.On May 22, PP leader Pablo Casado

denounced Podemos’ “Caracas project,

JOINT TICKET:United Left’s AlbertoGarzón andPodemos’ PabloIglesias – UnidosPodemos/‘United WeCan’ could overtakethe PSOE andconfront it with thechoice of taking partin a left governmentor becomingirrelevant

left government in sight?

Issue 47827th May – 9th June 2016

email: voice.editorial@googlemail.comscottishsocialistvoice.wordpress.com

for Socialism, Independenceand Internationalism

Promoted by Jim McVicar on behalf of the Scottish Socialist Party, Suite 370, Central Chambers, 93 Hope Street, Glasgow G2 6LD. Printed by Forward Graphics, Elderpark Workspace, 100 Elderpark Street, Glasgow G51 3TR

by Liam McLaughlin

WITH THE Holyrood election now over,and the hurt of a bruising night for the leftand progressive forces involved with thepro-independence campaign of 2014starting to dissipate, one significant silverlining can be taken from the make up ofour parliament for the next five-year term.

There’s an inbuilt majority against theonly act ever to pass through the ScottishParliament without any form of cross partysupport—the Offensive Behaviour at Foot-ball and Threatening Communications Act.

Railroaded through the parliament inthe months following the SNP majority winof 2011, the Offensive Behaviour Act wasthe SNP and Police Scotland response toa series of incidents surrounding footballand the targeted and bigoted campaign ofbombs, bullets and threats to the lives ofprominent Celtic supporters and staff asthe underlying anti-Irish racism that stillexists in large parts of the West of Scot-land bubbled over into media limelight.

Deeply flawedThe act however was deeply flawed

from its inception, sold on a pack of spinand deceit that it was brought into force todeal with sectarianism in Scotland, despitethe word sectarianism failing to appear inthe entire legislation and existing laws al-ready covering aspects of sectarian andreligiously motivated bigotry and hatred.

In practice, the Act in fact criminalisesanything upon which a “reasonable per-son” would deem to be offensive.

This can range from non-discriminatorypolitical expression like declaring supportfor a united Ireland, to as far as a fan at amatch swearing in the crowd towards op-posing fans or players.

To draw the act to its (il)logical conclu-sion could see both sides of the debateon upcoming EU membership or theScottish Referendum of 2014 broughtthrough the courts for airing those viewsat or in the vicinity of a football match.

The scope of the act is so wide and un-specified that there doesn’t actually have to

be anyone reporting to be offended in orderfor a conviction or charge to be brought,and the term deemed an offence does notactually have to be at a football match butcan be on the way to a game or even in apub that happens to be showing the match.

Anyone associated with the footballingworld or the fight for the protection of civilliberties since its inception will testify to thelong lasting damage the Act has caused inthe relationship between largely workingclass young football fans and how theyview the newly centralised, aggressive andunaccountable police force and also thewider justice/legal system in this country.

With an upcoming private members billseeking to repeal the Act, it can only behoped that this illiberal, deeply flawed leg-islation is killed off once and for all and thatthere shall be no need for a Fans AgainstCriminalisation campaign next season.

At the time of writing however, Voicereaders will be aware of the aftermath of therecent Scottish Cup final and the dreadfulscenes which accompanied the final whistlewhich has reportedly seeing players andstaff of Rangers FC assaulted on the pitch.

Let me be clear that these scenes areembarrassing and shameful for ScottishFootball, but let us also be clear theymake no case for the retention of the Act.

These events occurred with the Act inplace, and were in fact all offences cov-

ered by existing legislation in relation tocrowd control and common assault.

A much deeper analysis, particularly forthose of us in the socialist movementmust take place to attempt to draw widerconclusions and answers to the age oldquestions of why working class people’srelationship with football is so often anemotional release from the strains andpressures of everyday life in austerityBritain and why our relationship as a na-tion with alcohol is so deeply entrenchedand so fundamentally damaging.

Damaging legislationIn the 17 years since our parliament’s

inception, the Offensive Behaviour atFootball Act is the single worst piece ofshoddy, short term and deeply damagingpiece of legislation to be enacted from in-side its walls. The upcoming months giveus a chance to blow the final whistle onthe Act and re-evaluate our entire strat-egy in the fight against bigotry, sectarian-ism and anti-Irish racism which still existin modern day Scotland and which scarsour great nation so profoundly.

A problem I believe that education, in-clusivity and community building willsolve, not short term, flawed legislationdreamt up and forced through in the af-termath of an election.

It’s time to #AxeTheAct and lead that fight.

Holyrood must axe offensivebehaviour at football law

AXE THE ACT: the ugly scenes that followed the recent Scottish Cup Final were all offencescovered by existing legislation in relation to crowd control and common assault – they makeno case for the retention of the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act