Successful Conference: Setting Our Own Agenda for a National Health Service

Workers' Daily Internet Edition : Article Index :

Successful Conference: Setting Our Own Agenda for a National Health Service

Northern Region of RCPB(ML) Publishes Seminar Paper

International:
World Economic Forum Holds Annual Meeting

New York City Days of Action Oppose Imperialist Globalisation

World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil

Spanish Demonstration against Police Brutality of Moroccan Immigrants

Setting Our Own Agenda for a National Health Service was the title of the conference organised on Saturday, February 2, in South Shields, Tyne and Wear. The organisers, Gateshead and South Tyneside UNISON Health Branches, had invited health staff and anyone concerned about the health service to take part in the conference and discuss how the people can safeguard the future of the NHS. Twenty-one participants representing a broad section of health workers, including people from the community, registered in the morning. The conference aims were to involve health workers and people in the community in speaking about their experience and giving their views, all as part of setting their own agenda and building the opposition.

Two extended presentations were made to the conference. In the morning Robin Moss spoke as a senior UNISON officer who had been involved with others for six years and had considerable experience in dealing with the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) under both Conservative and Labour governments. In the afternoon Roger Nettleship, who had stood in the General Election as an independent candidate for South Shields representing the interests of the health workers, gave a presentation on building the opposition. Dr Richard Taylor MP, a member of the Save Kidderminster Hospital campaign who was elected to Parliament for Ross on Wye as an independent MP by defeating the incumbent Labour MP at the last election, sent a message and his best wishes to the participants.

In his presentation Robin Moss gave a detailed factual account of the PFI hospital projects. He exposed how under the Conservatives, and then particularly under New Labour, PFI had become a scandalous mechanism that was enabling companies, banks and shareholders to amass in profits vast sums of public money in guaranteed contracts for 30 and some even for 45 years. Payments were guaranteed and index linked increasing the capital costs of the hospitals from around 6% to around 20% of their income. He explained in detail the PFI at Durham and Carlisle, and used his knowledge of the many other PFI projects in the region and in the country. He pointed out that PFI is a politically driven process, not one driven by the health needs of the local population. Figures are fiddled so that the private sector option is always chosen instead of direct public funding. But, ironically, large sums of public money are injected to bail out the project, and because projects are unaffordable, bed numbers, budgets and staffing levels are all cut regardless of local health needs.

Robin Moss explained the huge delays and costs that occurred in PFI contracting and that it was only after the "preferred bidder" was chosen in a PFI contract that the contracts were fully costed. Then they were compared with a public investment build, which came out far cheaper each time, but he explained how the whole comparison was rigged in favour of the private sector. In Carlisle, between 1993 and 1997, the cost of the PFI project rose from £41 million to £88 million. Of the extra costs, £17 million are attributable purely to PFI, or around 20% of the total cost. He said costs are passed on to the taxpayer, so that not only are these funds taken away from health care but the government is passing funds taken from the people's pockets over to the PFI partner to pay for their extra financial costs and their profit margins. In Durham, between 1994 and 1998, the project went up in cost from £60 million to £86 million. He said that at Durham costs paid for legal and consultancy fees alone were £2.5 million, not including the PFI partners' costs that were also fed back in. He pointed out that because of the closure of Kiddernminster hospital people elected an independent MP as opposed to a Labour MP. The PFI project at Worcester had risen from £49 million to £108 million, led to bed cuts of 28% and crucially caused the closure of Kidderminster hospital to pay for the PFI hospital 25 miles away at Worcester.

He said that "whenever New Labour stand up and say that they have got the biggest hospital building project since the war, what is happening? Is it meeting health needs? No, it isn't!" Then he said, "What is the one figure in all this process that is going up and not going down. The one figure of course is the rate of return, the profitability rate to the private sector. In Durham the rate of return to the private contractors is 18.5%."

Then he characterised the situation. "Building new hospitals with the PFI process is a bit like paying for your mortgage with your Barclaycard. Hands up all those in this room who pay for their mortgage with their Barclaycard? Nobody!"

Towards the end of his presentation Robin Moss said health campaigners are being told to stay with the Labour Party and fight to win concessions and to get the government to change its mind. He said this was tried with the Tory Party and Tory government before the 1997 election. This was tried with the Labour Party before it was elected. It has been tried year in, year out, since 1997 and health campaigners have totally failed to move the government. He said that everyone not yet disillusioned with this course needs to think through the political consequences because they are proving disastrous for the people. He concluded by saying that Kidderminster was a significant fact in the political wind and that it is a tragedy that PFI and the whole obsession with the private sector has diverted the debate about modernising and delivering public service improvements. It has become a debate about the method rather than the substance of it, he said to warm applause from the participants.

In the afternoon session, Roger Nettleship whilst acknowledging in his presentation that the public health care system was a great advance for society went on to outline the principles on which a modern health care system should be built. He made a number of important points, saying that health care was a human right which should be guaranteed in law. Serious scientific assessment of all treatments should be provided. The people must have the first claim on the economy and indeed should become the decision makers in society. He summarised that a modern definition of society's obligation to provide health care would start with the principle that health care is a right, and that the fight should be joined to renew society so that it is legally guaranteed that the people's claims to health care are met. He then exposed how the "Third Way" programme of New Labour neither safeguarded the NHS nor aimed at developing it into a fully modern system, but was a retrogressive programme to further use the NHS as a source of profits for big business.

Going on to speak about building the opposition, he said that it was important to develop the means so as to continue to expose what the government and opposition parties are saying on health. "But the most important issue," he said, "is building a force that does not rely on pressurising the government into doing what is right, or seeing sense, but to fight to realise our agenda, our programme to safeguard the future of the NHS."

He then spoke about his experience in standing in the General Election. He said that he had put forward a draft programme that, in addition to those principles for the NHS outlined earlier, "demanded that people must become the decision makers, replacing the outdated political system where parties come to power". He outlined this whole programme, contrasting it with one focusing on influencing the big parties in power. To create illusions that they will one day represent the aspirations of the working class, or can be pressurised into doing so, and building one's plans on that, the speaker said, is putting the whole future of the working class in jeopardy. He said that, in his opinion, "the most important political and organisational question facing the working class movement today is that of developing itself as a political force with its own worker politicians". He concluded by saying, "The need of the time is for health workers along with other workers to directly intervene in politics and represent their own interests as well as the interests of society. The realisation of this task has proceeded from small beginnings, but it is the most crucial question for the working class and people to take up in order for society to progress." The presentation was received with warm applause from those participating in the conference.

Following each of the two presentations, people participated with questions and contributions. The aim of the conference was to develop discussion so as to elaborate the topic and hear all the views, and the rules of discussion agreed by the conference in the morning successfully created this atmosphere. At the conclusion of the conference it was very much left to people to make up their own minds and take their conclusions back to the various collectives to which they belonged. The conference passed a motion to publish a report on the proceedings so as to further the work of involving more people in the discussion on the task of safeguarding the future of the NHS.

The Northern Region of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) on February 10, 2002, launched the publication of the first in what is projected to be a series of papers. The pamphlet is entitled "The Legitimacy of States and the Domino Theory". It comprises the text of the paper given on December 5, 2001, in the Marxist-Leninist Seminar Series held in the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. The seminars are being organised by the Northern Region of RCPB(ML) and Workers’ Weekly Youth Group.

The pamphlet is priced at £1.50 and is available from Workers’ Resource Centre, John Buckle Books, 170 Wandsworth Road, London SW8 2LA.

From January 31-February 4, the World Economic Forum (WEF) held its 32nd annual meeting in New York City. More than 2,700 participants from 106 countries attended the meeting, including 30 heads of state, 100 cabinet ministers and 74 ambassadors. This was the first time since its founding in 1971 that the meeting was not held in Davos, Switzerland. The WEF is funded by contributions of 1,000 of the world's largest corporations who pay $30,000 each.

This year's meeting was held under the overall theme, "Leadership in Fragile Times: A Vision for a Shared Future." The WEF took up "the need to make the coalition against terrorism, put together after the September 11 terrorist attacks here, into a coalition against poverty as well". It argued that "poverty is the breeding ground for terrorism, which makes a coalition against poverty an insurance policy for security".

Klaus Schwab, who heads the World Economic Forum, said other issues included "an assessment of recession and recovery in the world economy, the question of how to achieve more security after the attacks of September 11, ways to increase understanding between cultures as diverse as those in the Western and Islamic worlds, and the question of leadership." "We need to re-evaluate leadership," Schwab said. "If you look at country meltdowns like Argentina or imploding companies like Enron," he said, "it is clear we have to find better ways to prevent such crises."

Schwab announced that the annual summit meeting would return to Davos next year and said the Swiss federal and local authorities would contribute the lion's share of about 10 million Swiss francs ($5.9 million) in security costs.

In his contribution, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, called for a $50 billion increase in aid. He said the total was still less than would be needed to fulfil a failed pledge by the Group of Seven leading industrialised countries at their last summit meeting in Genoa.

Showing the breadth of the convergence in New York, the January 31 spokescouncil meeting for the New York City Days of Action against the World Economic Forum (WEF) included delegations and affinity groups from Britain and Canada, and from across the US.

During the early evening of January 31, more than 4,000 workers, women, youth and students, as well as trade union, social and political activists rallied along 5th Avenue with the militant demand: Global Justice! The rally, called by the New York City Central Labour Council (NYC-CLC), the AFL-CIO and Jobs with Justice, targeted the flagship store of the Gap as a symbol of the super-exploitation being imposed on workers around the world through neo-liberal globalisation. They denounced the inhuman working conditions of Gap production workers, as well as workers in other industries. The rally stretched along four city blocks. The rally was a featured action in a day long Working Families Economic Forum sponsored by the NYC-CLC.

Also participating in the rally were several hundred mostly youth and students taking part in the two-day Globalise Justice WEF Counter-Summit at Columbia University. The Summit, organised by Students for Global Justice, involved more than 700 registered participants. Participants included many from California and the West Coast of the US, as well as sizeable delegations from Britain and Quebec. Workshops on Thursday included presentations and discussion on the social movements of Central and Latin America and the infamous US Army School of Americas at Fort Benning Georgia.

The conference also served as a converging point, including training and planning, for the main demonstrations on February 2.

Militant and spirited demonstrations against the WEF took place on February 2 as the people took their stand to say "Another World Is Possible!" The demonstrations were characterised by the growing determination of the people to be the ones to create and shape their future and ensure it is one that serves their interests. Despite repeated police provocations against the demonstrations and efforts to prevent people from participating, the demonstrators stood as one with the common refrain rising from the various marches and rallies: "Whose Streets? Our Streets! Whose World? Our World! Whose Future? Our Future!" With such chants and their many slogans and placards, the people raised the central issue of the Days of Action and the WEF: Who Decides? Their resounding answer: We Decide!

The many signs and chants against US imperialism and for the rights of the people stood out: "Stop the US War Machine from Palestine to the Philippines"; "Down With US Imperialism!"; "Corporate Globalisation=Imperialist Domination"; "WEF: They Are All Enron, We Are All Argentina" and "Our World is Not for Sale!" Signs and speakers at the two main rallies repeatedly spoke to the fight to create a world that provides for the needs of the people and the planet, while showing that the existing system is unsustainable. The firm opposition to imperialist globalisation and imperialist war was clear, as was the effort to build the international unity of the peoples. Among the speakers represented at the rallies were representatives from peoples' movements in Palestine, Korea, the Philippines, Somalia, Iraq, Mexico, Colombia and Puerto Rico, speakers representing the Islamic community as well as activists from numerous anti-war, social justice and political organisations. The need to change the role of the US in the world to ensure the US serves as an asset to the world's people could also be seen. One of the banners capturing the spirit of many said: "Put the World's People First: No US Troops Abroad! No to Use of Force! Cancel the Debts! Reparations Now!"

On Sunday, February 3, with the main Day of Action passed, police seized on the smaller number of activists to enact their most sweeping and arbitrary arrests.

On the occasion of the New York City Days of Action, solidarity demonstrations were held in various cities in the US, Britain, Canada, Italy and Switzerland.

Representing a broad range of social movements worldwide, tens of thousands of activists opened the Second World Social Forum (WSF) in Porto Alegre, Brazil on February 1 with a massive peace march. Local police estimated as many as 40,000 people joined the march.

The six-day conference, under the slogan "Changing the World is Possible", featured 700 workshops, 100 seminars and 28 plenary assemblies with more than 15,000 delegates from 123 countries. The topics of discussion were divided into four categories: the creation and distribution of wealth; access to wealth and sustainability; civil society and the public arena; and political power and ethics in the new society. The Argentine economic crisis and striving for world peace were highlighted along with the problems of Third World debt, corporate taxation, cultural diversity, water as a public utility, food security and the role of women in globalisation.

The participants included four Nobel Prize winners, ministers from several Latin American countries, some cabinet level ministers from Europe – six from France alone – and at least a thousand journalists.

The forum coincided with the World Economic Forum in held New York City. One of the organisers of the WSF, Bernard Cassen, stated that "the shipwreck of Argentina is a real example of the ravages of economic liberalisation". Speaking with reporters on January 31, Luis Inacio "Lula" da Silva – the leader of Brazil's Worker's Party – said that while the economic forum in New York is meeting to figure out ways to make more profits and accumulate wealth, the WSF in Porto Alegre is discussing ways to distribute wealth more equitably. He also condemned the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), which he called the US plan to economically annex the region. "Lula" said that participants at the forum in Brazil were concerned with how humans can live with dignity, not how much money they can make.

The first World Social Forum was in reply to the traditional Davos World Economic Summit. But participants said that during this second summit, the Davos gathering – which was moved to New York – had to respond to their concerns in a world increasingly questioning the current international economic order thanks in large part to their efforts.

At an organisation committee press conference a day before the official opening ceremony, Carlos Tiburcio of the Action for a Financial Transaction in Support of Citizens (ATTAC), told an auditorium packed with reporters from all over the world that the war on terrorism was "an attempt to impose a single line of thought throughout the world". "That line of thought, one that criminalises anyone who opposes neo-liberal globalisation, will not stand," he said. "It will be shattered right here in Porto Alegre."

Maria Luisa Mendonca of the Brazilian Social Justice Network for Human Rights told the press conference that "basically the WSF is a chance to articulate the voices of the social movement from different parts of the world who come to Porto Alegre to exchange experiences and views and make concrete actions and campaigns to create alternatives to the neo-liberal economic model".

Organising committee member Oded Grajew strongly condemned the "assassination, the murder – murder of some 4,000 persons" in the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, but added: "That story made headlines in all of our countries for months. But every single day 40,000 children die, die of preventable hunger. That is 10 times the amount of people who died in the attacks."

"Yesterday 40,000 children died of hunger around the world. Today 40,000 children will die of hunger, preventable hunger, around the world. Tomorrow 40,000 children around the world will die of hunger. There are no headlines about this. This is what we want to do here. When this becomes news, that is the point where we will have succeeded."

Joao Pedro Stedile of the Landless Peasants Movement said that after September 11, "The United States has exercised its military power to exploit whatever wealth we still have left." He said the United States was using the war as an excuse to set up a military presence in Brazil, Colombia and other areas of the world "to suppress social movements". Grajew said, "we are seeking a world of peace and social justice and the globalisation of human rights. What we need is a radial change from what the world is today."

"The World Trade Organisation does not support free trade, despite demanding poor countries to liberalise their economies, but is a protectionist vehicle for the rich countries," said Martin Kohr, a Malaysian representative of the Third World Network.

"Latin America saw its market share drop from 11 percent to five per cent; Africa's fell to two percent from eight and the world's 49 poorest countries represent barely 0.4 percent" of global trade, said Africa Trade Network's Dot Keet. "The more we pay, the less we have, the more we need," said Argentina's Nobel Prize winner Adolfo Perez Ezquivel.

"The enemy calls us 'anti,' they say we complain, we are the anti-Forum, anti-globalisation, while our movement, really, is globally for democracy, equality, diversity, justice and quality of life," said Lori Wallach of the US watchdog group Public Citizen. "Our toughest job is to articulate what we really stand for," she added.

There would be no final declaration, Sergio Haddad of the Brazilian Association of Non-governmental Organisations said because "no one single document can speak for all of us represented here. This is place for debate, for plans for action. It begins here. It does not end here."

During the discussions in Porto Alegre, participants strongly criticised the United States for its war of aggression against Afghanistan, which Washington likes to call its "war on terrorism". Debates also centred on the US plan known as the Free Trade Area of the Americas – which delegates condemned as a scheme to economically annex the region.

Delegates also accused the International Monetary Fund of pressuring poor countries to adopt economic programmes that only worsen social inequalities and aggravate poverty. And they agreed to co-ordinate protests against the economic policies of international lending agencies – with demonstrations planned throughout Europe and the United States.

Delegates to the WSF also voiced their strong condemnation of Washington's economic blockade of Cuba. In statements to the media at the conclusion of the five-day meeting, delegates said the 40-year-old blockade of the island was illegal and immoral.

Participants at the Second World Social Forum not only condemned the US blockade against Cuba and expressed their solidarity with the Cuban Revolution, but also spoke out on behalf of the Palestinian people and their right to self-determination – condemning the repressive measures being carried out by Israel.

The Second World Social Forum wound up on Tuesday with an extensive agenda of anti-globalisation protests to be held over the next 12 months. The nearly 60,000 participants first put their sights on the summit of European heads of state to take place in Barcelona, Spain, next March 15 and 16.

Participants said the voices of anti-free market globalisation activists will also be heard at the UN Conference on Financing Development in Monterrey, Mexico, in March, at activities for the International Day Against Militarism and in Favour of Peace in Rome, Italy, in May, at the World Food Summit also in Rome in June, at the Summit of European Heads of State in Seville, Spain, in June, and at the Summit of the Group of 8 Industrialised Nations in Canada in July, among many others.

On February 3, hundreds of people took part in the Spanish southern town of Almeria in a demonstration to condemn the police brutality against some 300 Moroccan immigrants. The demonstration, sponsored by over 20 Spanish political parties, trade unions and non-governmental organisations, was organised to protest against the repression and harassment of Moroccans who were demonstrating to claim the regularisation of their situation in Spain.

The Spanish police used tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the rally. Twenty-eight people were arrested and more than 20 others were wounded. The demonstrators shouted slogans rejecting police brutality and read a communiqué stating that repression cannot solve the problem of illegal immigrants and calling for Spanish authorities to grant the group of illegal immigrants legal stay and work documents. Organisers said that Spanish society requires the means to promote peaceful coexistence by enacting laws that reject racism and xenophobia.