Since
coming to power in 2010, the current coalition government in the UK has
implemented drastic austerity policies across the public sector. During the
Spring semester 2013, the local University and College Union (UCU) association
at Nottingham University organised a series of talks on local anti-cuts
initiatives. The purpose of this post is to bring together the various reports
from these talks.
Photo by Dean Thorpe |
(1)
austerity policies have nothing to do with cutting back national debt. Rather,
they are intended to open up the public sector to private investment;
(2)
downward pressure on terms and conditions of those working in the public sector is the general result;
(3)
austerity policies are mainly directed against the weak and vulnerable in
society;
(4)
austerity policies are decided by those, who will not be negatively affected by
them. Cuts in education and health have no implications for the rich, who are
already accessing private education and health services; and
(5)
many current policies had already been initiated by previous New Labour
governments. Turning austerity around will, therefore, need to go beyond
defeating the current government. It also requires an internal struggle for the
direction of the Labour party.
Overall,
austerity is a class project against working people’s gains since 1945!
The
reports collected in this post highlight the dramatic implications of cuts, but
they are also a testimony to the continuation of resistance and the possibility
that austerity can be defeated.
Since
April 2013, health service contracts have also been offered to private
providers, able to cherry pick profitable parts of the NHS such as walk-in
treatment centres. Opening up the NHS to private capital is clearly the purpose
underlying this change in legislation. The related implications are two-fold:
(1) while patients may receive similar levels of service from these privatised
units during the initial years, this is highly likely to decline later on; (2) privatisation
will lead to a two-tier labour market, where workers in private facilities will
earn less and have less good pensions than in the NHS. Downward pressure on
wages and working conditions across the sector is the inevitable result. Yet,
resistance against privatisation continues. The main aim of the Broxtowe Save
Our NHS campaign is regime change and, thus, the de-selection of the current local
Conservative MP Anna Soubry.
Hands Off Our Schools!
Hands Off Our Schools!
After coming to power in 2010, the new government pushed in record time an education bill through Parliament, facilitating the transition of schools into academies. In order to incentivise this transition, funds are channelled from local education authority budgets to new academies. As a result, other schools suffer further cuts and essential local services for children with special needs are under threat. There is uncertainty over teachers’ terms and conditions in academies and in general the switch to academies may be the first step towards the privatisation of education more generally, considering the recent emphasis on so-called ‘free schools’. Resistance against the transition to academies continues, but in order to be successful it requires an alliance between parents of pupils at the school and the teachers.
Women
are particularly negatively affected by current austerity policies. Considering
that two-thirds of public sector employees are women, job cuts in the public
sector will affect women disproportionately. Moreover, it is often women in our
society, which have caring responsibilities. Cuts to benefits, as a result,
also affect especially women. Finally, women are also more likely to suffer
from cuts to public services, considering that they are more likely to be lone
parents or to suffer from domestic abuse. Nevertheless, women are not
defenceless victims. The Nottingham Women’s
Conference on 21 September 2013 has the goal to raise consciousness and
empower women to stand up for their rights.
The
bedroom tax is one of the clearest examples of how austerity policies are
mainly directed against the poor and the weak. It affects people in social
housing, who are deemed to have a spare bedroom and, therefore, are asked to
move to smaller accommodation or have their housing benefits cut. The tax does
not only endanger these people’s livelihood, it also puts them under enormous
psychological stress, as they live in constant fear of receiving a letter of
eviction. Considering that the eviction of tenants is more expensive than the money
saved through the tax, it may well be that social housing as such is the main
target of the tax.
It
is the proliferation of food banks, which most dramatically illustrates the
devastating social implications of austerity. Overall, there are now 15 food
banks in the wider area of Nottingham, where people can turn to in order to
receive emergency food supplies. The main reason for why people need to access
food banks is the changes to the welfare system. When people have their
benefits withdrawn or cut by job centres, they often have no alternative than
to go to a food bank to feed themselves and their families. The proliferation
of food banks makes clear that austerity must be resisted and defeated.
Prof. Andreas Bieler
Professor of Political Economy
University of Nottingham/UK
Personal website: http://andreasbieler.net
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcome!