Here are some of the changes:
1. Improved readability. We have changed the fonts, spacing and column widths so articles should be easier to read on-screen, especially our longer articles.
2. Better phone compatibility. The website layout now resizes automatically to the size of your phone or tablet. You're not seeing an annoying 'special' mobile version", but the site itself adapting into one column. Why not try it on your phone now?
3. Clutter-free printouts. Printing now automatically produces a page with just the text and pictures you want, with no sidebar or other menus making a mess of the page.
4. Bigger pictures. As more new articles come online, you will see that we are now able to use Red Pepper's great photography and illustration across a greater width, so you get the full impact.
5. Social media integration. The new left-hand 'toolbar' lets you easily share an article with your friends on Facebook or Twitter, without having to copy-and-paste or hunt for the button.
If you appreciate these new features, why not make a donation to our fundraising appeal so we can keep making it even better?
All thoughts and feedback are welcome in the comments below.
Their banner reads:
“Ex-Midrand Council Workers in Dispute Since 1994!
Dismissed for fighting corruption in 1994 and still fighting today!
20 years of Sacrifice! 20 Years of Poverty! 20 Years of Solidarity!”
South Africa’s ex-Midrand Council workers are engaged in what is surely the world’s longest running industrial dispute, a Burston for our times. It started back in 1994, in the midst of the birth pains of South African democracy, when more than 500 workers employed by Midrand Council took industrial action against corrupt employment practices. At that time, local government structures had not yet been subject to democratic ‘transformation’; they were still the creations of the apartheid era. Midrand was run by remnants of the old regime with no interest in reaching a settlement. Under pressure, some strikers returned to work, but the great majority remained in dispute.
In 1996, Midrand Council disappeared into the new local government structures, its responsibilities passed to Johannesburg City Council. There were hopes that the dispute would now be resolved, with the strikers re-integrated into the council workforce, but these came to nothing, thanks to endless buck-passing and bureaucratic inertia (i.e. lack of political will).
The now ex-Midrand workers were left in limbo, on strike against an authority that no longer existed, pressing their demands on an authority that refused to recognise them as employees.
Through all this time, to the present day, the strikers have continued to meet, to agitate and to organise. Many of the original group have passed away (though some of their descendants are active in the campaign). Some have reached pension age (but receive no pension). Others have become too sick and weak to work, and others have moved out of the vicinity, often seeking refuge with family in far-away communities. As a recent statement from the South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU) says, “Despite these hardships and sometimes with virtually no external support, the Midrand workers have remained resolute and committed to settling their dispute with dignity and with fairness.”
Every Sunday
For 19 years, they have met every Sunday in Ivory Park/Tembisa “in significant numbers, and often in excess of 120, to hear progress in their dispute, and to share whatever meagre resources they have.”
For many years, they did so with no help from outside, relying entirely on their own resources, which were meagre but treated collectively. In 2009, SAMWU assumed a more active role. With the full support of the 283 remaining ex-Midrand strikers, the union resolved to launch a “political intervention” to secure a just resolution.
Negotiations with Johannesburg authorities commenced but were dogged by what SAMWU describes as “delays and roadblocks.” The election of a new mayor in 2012 led to further postponements. A recent public letter from SAMWU notes:
“Two months ago, we learned that a report [on the Midrand dispute] had in fact been submitted to the Mayoral Committee, but we were not allowed to see it, or were able to contribute to it. Indeed we have not even been informed of the outcomes of the Mayoral Committee’s deliberations. In our view this contradicts both the consultation process we had agreed, and national and local government policy of open and transparent government.
“We can only assume that there are forces within the council who are determined to derail the cause of the Midrand workers, and who perhaps for reasons only known to themselves do not want the Midrand case resolved.”
Nonetheless, support for the Midrand workers is growing. Their campaign has been endorsed by COSATU and many of its affiliates. Media interest has also risen in recent months, in South Africa and beyond.
It’s a small scale struggle with a very big resonance. The context includes the debate about the relation of labour unions to the ANC government, the widespread feeling that the post-apartheid regime has failed to deliver on the promises of liberation, and the hot issue of corruption. The ANC’s right-wing opponents exploit the latter for their own ends, but it is nonetheless a reality, a corrosive force running counter to democratic aspirations. Through SAMWU and other unions, public sector workers have shown that they want to tackle corruption and need support from their employers to do so. Obviously there are others with different interests.
In any case, the ex-Midrand workers deserve support and solidarity from trades unionists everywhere, especially public sector trades unionists. Their tenacity is an example to us all.
Contact SAMWU for more information.
Tunisia is gripped by its most serious political crisis since 2011, caused by a breakdown of trust between the government and its opponents and compounded by growing terrorism and a collapsing economy. Last weekend saw a rise in tension, with protestors filling the capital demanding the immediate resignation of the Islamist government.
Yet one local trade union may save the day, and not for the first time. The Tunisian General Union of Labour (UGTT) has affected the character of Tunisia as a whole since the late 1940s. It impacted significantly the 2011 revolution and the transition period and is likely to impact the future. Its current role as mediator between the government and opposition must be seen in historical perspective, as, arguably, the role of Tunisia’s labour movement is what sets it apart from the rest of the Arab World.
Child of protest, midwife of revolution
Trade unionism in Tunisia goes back to 1924 when Mohamed Ali al Hammi (1890-1928), the forefather of the movement, founded the General Federation of Tunisian Workers. But it was under the guidance of the charismatic and visionary Farhat Hached (1914-1952) that a strong home-grown organization would emerge. Hached learned union activism and organisation within the French colonial union, the CGT, for 15 years before splitting from it to start UGTT in 1946. The new union quickly gained support, clout and international ties, which it used to pressure the French for more social and political rights for Tunisia and to consolidate its position as a key component in the national liberation movement. The union’s inception in the midst of an independence struggle cemented its political character, a line it has kept and vigorously defended ever since.
Since then, UGTT has been a continuous presence in the country. During the one-party rule of Presidents Habib Bourgiba and Ben Ali, it constituted a credible alternative to the party’s power and a locus of resistance to it, so much so that being a unionist became a euphemism for being a member of the opposition.
Given UGTT's power and popularity, successive governments have tried to compromise with, co-opt, repress or change the union, depending on political sympathies and the balance of power at hand. In 1978, the Bourguiba government attempted to change a union leadership judged to be too oppositional and powerful. The entire leadership of the union was put on trial and replaced by regime loyalists. Ensuing popular riots were repressed by the army, resulting in dozens of deaths. The cost was the worst setback to the union’s history since the assassination of its founder in 1952.
UGTT has been the outcome of Tunisian resistance and its incubator at the same time. In December 2010, UGTT – particularly its teachers’ unions and local offices – became the headquarters of revolt against the President. Many of the demands of the rising masses – jobs, national dignity, freedom – had long been on the agenda of the union, which includes 24 regional unions, 19 sector-based unions and 21 grass roots unions and has over 500,000 members. Furthermore, the union holds a strong support-base in the rural areas where the revolution started.
But after the revolution was complete, UGTT again became a target. On 4 December 2012, as the union was gearing up to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Hached’s assassination, its iconic headquarters were attacked, allegedly by groups known as Leagues for the Protection of the Revolution. The incident was ugly, public and of immediate impact. The leagues had originated in community organisations set up in the aftermath of the January 14 revolution to keep the peace in the security vacuum left which had reportedly become dominated by Islamists. UGTT responded by boycotting plenary sessions of parliament, organising regional strikes and marches, and eventually calling for a general strike on 13 December, the first such action since 1978.
Threats have also come from those on the inside. On August 26, 2013, a group of trade unionists founded the Tunisian Labour Organization, aiming, according to its leaders, at correcting the direction of UGTT. Sami Tahri, the UGTT spokesperson responded dismissively to this move, arguing that this was no more than the reaction of losers who failed to win elected offices in UGTT and were unable to drag the union into the “house of obedience”, referring to the new organisation’s ties to the ruling Al-Nahda party. This lack of concern may be justified, given UGTT’s history of warding off a number of attempts at takeover, division or weakening over the past sixty years or so.
Qualified mediator
Despite antagonistic relations with governments before and after the revolution, UGTT remains perhaps the only body in the country qualified to resolve disputes peacefully. After January 2011, it emerged as the key mediator and power broker at the initial phase of the revolution, winning trust from political players across the spectrum. It was within the union that the committee which regulated the transition to the elections of 23 October 2011 was formed.
At the same time, UGTT has used its leverage to secure historic victories for its members and for workers in general, including permanent contracts for over 350,000 temporary workers and pay rises for several sectors, including teachers.
As Tunisia moved from a period of revolutionary harmony to one characterised by a multiplicity of parties and a polarisation of public opinion, the challenge for UGTT was to keep its engagement in politics without falling under the control of a particular party or indeed turning into one. But, due to historical reasons which saw leftists channel their energy into trade unionism when their political activities were curtailed, UGTT has remained on the left of the political spectrum. This has continued in the face of rising Islamist power, with the union keeping or even strengthening ties with the numerous newly-formed parties of the left. For these reasons, UGTT has remained decidedly outside the control of the Islamist government, which has had to come to terms with the union’s role and status.
UGTT has a significant role to play in the current political crisis, acting as a mediator between government and opposition in an attempt to end the current political stalemate. Many of the protestors’ demands line up with those of UGTT: the resignation of the current government, its replacement by a non-political government, curtailing the work of the Tunisian Parliament, the ANC, and reviewing top government appointments. It also asks for the immediate dissolution of the Leagues for the Defence of the Revolution.
Cracks in the armour
UGTT is not without blemish. A key paradox has been the relative absence of women in positions of leadership, despite the organisation’s support of women’s rights. UGTT compares unfavourably in this respect to other civil society organisations, with women leading the Business Association, the Journalists Association and the Council of Judges. Although some have suggested that the nature of trade union work, including canvassing opinion in the male-dominated cafes of Tunisia, has put women off positions, UGTT’s failure to promote women in leadership is a serious lacuna.
The union has also been accused of over-bureaucratisation and corruption at the top level, which has triggered several attempts at internal reform and even rebellion over the years. The power and money that come as perks of the job for top union officials can be dangerous in a climate of rife corruption. In 2000, former Secretary General Ismail Sahbbani resigned over allegations of embezzlement and financial misconduct.
UGTT also faces future challenges if it is to remain the strongest union at a time when three other split unions are in place and to maintain a political role now that politics has been largely turned over to political parties.
But despite these challenges, a combination of symbolic capital accumulated over decades, a good record of getting results for its members and well-oiled organisational apparatus across the country and in every sector of the economy has made UGTT an unavoidable, and perhaps unassailable, feature of Tunisian politics. For these reasons, UGTT figures are still capable of credible mediation despite setbacks, with their demonstrable expertise and experience placing them above most accusations of bias. UGTT is a defining element of what may be called the Tunisian exception in the MENA region and, if the trade union is successful this time in resolving the political crisis, it would become even more exceptional.
This article was first published at Think Africa Press
The Balcombe resistance continues with twists, turns and bizarre developments. Since Reclaim the Power ended, a callout for a 28-day rolling blockade dubbed ‘28 Days Later’ has been answered with a diversity of actions from a tripod in the road, to a local resident locked on to the roof of a tanker, a local environmental scientist handcuffed to the gate, a mass ‘balls to fracking’ football game at the gates and a man locked on to the tow bar of a caravan across the road – all stalling delivery lorries for up to five hours. Over 100 people have been arrested since the drilling began, with police increasingly carrying out snatch arrests and using obscure powers to quell protest.
As well as the Balcombe protesters' persistence and creativity, fracking firm Cuadrilla has experienced a series of setbacks on the site. Earlier this month it was discovered it had breached its planning permission by exceeding the amount of allowed noise pollution. Balcombe residents complained to local officials of loud drilling noise in the evenings, causing Cuadrilla to temporarily halt its drilling operations to install further sound proofing, but it has continued drilling on the site.
No permission
Earlier this month, Cuadrilla had to withdraw an application to extend its current planning permission. The application was originally filed in July and sought to extend its current planning permission, due to end at the end of September, by six months. However Friends of the Earth pointed out that the company should never have been granted planning permission in the first place, as current regulations require the company to notify landowners if they plan to horizontally drill under their homes. Cuadrilla has also discovered a need to extend its current drill site as it is too small to contain its operations. It further seeks to quell local residents’ fears by removing any reference to potential fracking.
While Cuadrilla plans to submit a new planning application, it will now have to cease operations after 28 September. This means that the fight to stop drilling in Balcombe has been moved back to the local council planning authorities. During a fresh round of consultation, local residents will be able to lodge objections to the proposed planning permission. This is also a major setback for the company as it will further delay its plans by several months.
And in a bizarre twist, it recently emerged that Cuadrilla may not have proper permission to drill the land anyway, as the land ‘owner’ has an agricultural mortgage with Lloyds TSB, who has not given permission for the non-agricultural use of the land. We await updates and confirmation of this situation.
Preparing to evict
Despite Cuadrilla’s drilling permission coming to an end, this week saw West Sussex County Council take the first steps in attempting to evict the Balcombe camp. On Monday, a county official served the camp with an eviction notice. The notice asked that protesters leave by 9am the next morning or the council would be forced to start legal proceedings against them. Earlier today the camp received a legal notice from the High Court for immediate possession, though protestors are contesting the short notice – Monday – of a court appearance that prevents effective preparation of a defence case. In a press release, the council said it was concerned by the increase in the number of blockades on the road and cited road safety as its reason for asking the protestors to leave.
Sussex Police also released a statement that same day, stating that a Section 14 order would be in place from 10am the following morning. A newly formed protest area would be set up across the road from the site to facilitate protests. Anyone found to be protesting outside that area would be subject to arrest. Many felt that this was possibly a backhanded way for the council to attempt to clear the camp. However the camp is still in existence, with the people in the camp defiant that they will stay. The council are now going through the appropriate legal channels to obtain a possession order which will allow the camp to be cleared. Much of the camp’s infrastructure is still in place, people are still camping outside the drilling site on the verges, and they are still standing in the road to slow the delivery lorries.
After 28 September, Cuadrilla plans to leave Balcombe and return to Lancashire to continue its drilling operations there. London-based company iGas is also scheduled to start drilling in Manchester within the coming months. Campaigners have vowed to replicate the Balcombe protest camp in any area of the country that is being threatened with unconventional fossil fuel extraction. It looks like we’ll see a very busy autumn full of anti-fracking action.
A workshop on 'work and transition' at the Reclaim The Power protest camp in Balcombe, Sussex, was part of an ongoing conversation between the labour and climate movements. It is a conversation which, in Britain, has involved the historic links between the Reclaim the Streets movement and striking dock workers in the 1990s. Lucas Aerospace workers’ transition plan in the 1970s, which proposed to repurpose their socially and ecologically unsustainable factories to produce socially necessary goods.
With the climate movement reviving in the context of the government’s newfound mania for expanding fossil fuel energy generation and 'extreme energy' solutions like fracking, it is a conversation which must be had again with a new generation of activists.
The workshop aimed to give activists who might not have engaged with the labour movement before to learn about trade unions and workers’ organisations, and to discuss questions around workers’ agency in fighting climate change and the potential for worker-led models of transition.
Manuel Cortes, general secretary of transport union TSSA, spoke about the links between the fight for a top-quality, publicly-owned transport system and the fight against climate change. Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) assistant general secretary Chris Baugh introduced the Campaign Against Climate Change’s 'One Million Climate Jobs' pamphlet, a campaigning publication which argues for investment in and expansion of 'green collar' jobs in sustainable, socially-necessary industries like transport, social housing construction, and renewable energy.
PCS officer Clara Paillard recounted her experiences as a workplace environmental rep fighting for sustainability in the workplace, making links with local environmental campaigners to fight the construction of a privately-operated, for-profit waste incinerator in their local area. Green Party activist Derek Wall discussed models from economic theory, including Karl Marx and Elinor Ostrom, which could help develop a vision for democratic collectivism and a sustainable future.
I spoke to tell the story of Workers’ Climate Action (WCA), a direct-action solidarity network active between 2006 and 2010 which aimed to bring a working-class political approach to the climate movement and radical ecological politics to the labour movement. WCA sought to make links with workers in high-emissions industries like energy and aviation, because we knew that a conversation about transition was only possible from within a framework of basic solidarity with workers’ day-to-day struggles.
Small-group discussion in the workshop covered a range of topics. It would be disingenuous to deny the difficulty of discussing the potential power of aviation, construction, and energy workers in a workshop made up of participants who had little or no experience of working in such industries. However, with participants working as teachers, journalists, and in local government – all sectors and industries with high levels of trade union organisation – there was plenty of opportunity to discuss applying workplace and union-focused models of environmental activism to participants’ own workplaces and experiences, rather than seeing them solely as something we can engage some alien worker 'other' with.
The green bans movement
An episode that came up repeatedly in the discussions was Australian construction workers’ 'green bans' movement in the 1970s (in fact the movement that originated the use of the term 'green' in politics). The New South Wales Builders Labourers Federation union put 'green bans' on a number of socially and environmentally unsustainable construction sites, insisting that their skills would not be used to damage the environment and the interests of working-class communities. The confidence and power of the BLF to launch such a movement was built up over years of struggle, including within their own union, over issues as fundamental as the right to have access to toilets on construction sites.
The lesson is that by organising and fighting over issues of day-to-day exploitation, workers can develop sufficient confidence in our own power to fight for the transformation of our industries and for control over what our labour is used for.
The workshop discussion generated one particularly exciting aspiration: a workers’ 'green ban' on fracking sites. That aspiration is not going to be realised overnight. Work is hard to come by for everyone, union organisation in the construction industry is weak, and with many construction worker activists still suffering from the long-term effects of blacklisting, it’s a big task to try and persuade workers to refuse jobs. But if the climate movement can develop a solidaristic, rather than antagonistic, relationship with construction workers on fracking sites or on new fossil-fuel power plant construction projects, we can amplify that conversation and put that aspiration at its centre.
In the workshop, we discussed some small-scale recent precedents for this, including WCA’s work engaging with workers at Kingsnorth and Ratcliffe-on-Soar power stations (the targets of the 2007 Climate Camp and the 2009 Climate 'Swoop' respectively).
The workshop, and the ongoing conversation of which it was a part, speak to the very core of the climate movement’s politics. A systemic understanding of where climate change comes from necessarily implies an integral role for organised labour in fighting it. The exploitative relationship between workers and bosses that is at the essential core of capitalism causes ecological damage because it subordinates labour, the process which mediates humanity’s relationship to our environment, to the chaos of markets and the profit motive.
A working-class political economy for the environment sees organised labour as a privileged agent in fighting not only against the immediate effects of climate chaos but for a democratic-collectivist society based on democratic planning in the interests of human need. That society should be the common aim of both the environmental and labour movements. If it is, we can begin to dissolve the distinction between 'environmental activist' and 'trade union activist' and aspire to a common identity as class-struggle activists fighting for a democratic and sustainable society – in other words, for socialism.
This conversation is set to continue at a TUC fringe meeting this week: Unions and communities together against fracking and for one million climate jobs, Monday 9th September, Bournemouth
Further reading:
Australia’s red-green pioneers', a history of the New South Wales BLF’s 'green bans' movement, abridged from his 1999 PhD thesis Going Into Uncharted Waters.
Lessons from the past: Lucas Aerospace and workers’ plans, a WCA briefing on the Lucas Aerospace workers’ plan
Real Green Deal: Lessons of the Lucas Aerospace plans by Hilary Wainwright and Andy Bowman
Around 5,000 fascists lead by Sir Oswald Mosely's Black Shirts were prevented from marching through the East End of London by anti-fascists including Jewish and Irish East Londoners.
A new documentary investigates this historic event and reflects on lessons for today, including the context of the 2011 riots. In this clip, Siobhan and Emeka speak to Binnie Yeates, who witnessed the battle when she was five and was left deeply affected.
At the Tower Hamlets archive, oral historian Roger Mills begins to unlock the untold story of the build up to the clash and the violent attacks on the Jewish, including footage from the battle itself.
Watch more clips from the film here.
This Saturday 7 September the EDL intend to march through Tower Hamlets and the London Antifascist Network are call for as many people as possible to join the counter-demonstration to stop them.
Who are DPAC?
We’re a campaign of disabled people not for disabled people. We came to life outside the 2010 Tory party conference, and since then we’ve been the primary group gathering snapshots of what disabled people are facing and getting together those ready to resist and take direct action.
On a daily basis hundreds of people contact us about getting involved or to tell us what they’re going through. Usually people associate disability with welfare but actually we’re talking to people about social care, transport, healthcare and more. The broad scope of the cuts means that people are really at a loss of what to do.
What do you mean by ‘disabled’?
The government says you’re disabled if you have a physical, sensory or mental impairment that affects your ability to do certain things. We say that if you self-recognise as a disabled person, or as a person with an impairment, then actually it’s society’s barriers that disable you. The more support systems that you have in place then the less disabling society becomes. Support services remove barriers and allow us to contribute and exist on the same level as everybody else.
As these services are whittled the barriers become evident and have a central place in people’s lives. It’s not enough to say that people should try harder to be ‘less disabled’, we need to change people’s mindsets on that. The government’s focus is completely wrong at the moment, it’s focussing on people instead of the barriers. We still can’t find our place and we’re being moved further and further to the margins.
Why direct action?
We moved into taking direct action, mostly because we believe the traditional forms of resistance such as lobbying, petitioning and research are more common, but there had been no direct action for a long time until we came along. Traditionally disabled people have been at the centre of direct action movements, as far back as the late 19th century.
We want to continue that tradition, so we’ve occupied government buildings, shut down city centres, and we went to the deputy prime minister’s home to hold a street party with UK Uncut. So we’re very much about taking the argument into the places and spaces where the government are. We need to join up across our networks to say 'we resist and the line in the sand is here'.
DPAC recently supported the anti-fracking campaign in Balcombe (pictured above) and you often work with UK Uncut, for instance on the campaign to save legal aid, is that part of a deliberate tactic to cover different issues?
Absolutely. Last year we received a lot of support from UK Uncut and this year we’ve branched out to work with the big disabled activist networks, such as the War On Welfare petition; the Mental Health Resistance Network, who recently won a court case against the workplace capability assessments that were discriminating against people with mental health conditions; and Black Triangle in Scotland. For our week of action this week we’ve reached out to these groups to make sure it’s not just about DPAC but about all disabled people.
One of the biggest philosophies for the disabled movement this time around has been the willingness of environmentalists and anti-cuts activists to embrace the idea that if they do recognise the barriers and try to address them, then actually disabled people can make a powerful contribution to campaigns. It’s not just a nod to accessibility or a nod to inclusion, it’s about taking real steps to make sure that all those barriers are removed so disabled people can contribute on the same level as everyone else.
It feels really different, because the last time the disabled movement reared its head in the 80s and early 90s it was very isolationist. Despite being politically active at the time against Thatcher and capitalism, disabled people were not really connecting with the broader movement. This time around the grass roots activist movements on the streets are so willing to embrace and support our actions that it’s made a huge difference in terms of what we can achieve together.
Do you have any hope for the next election?
This week we’re launching a manifesto which is directed at the Labour Party’s election campaign because we want them to repeal some decisions that have already been made. However, if we believe that reformist parliamentary opposition is the ‘be all and end all’ then we’re in for a very quick and hard landing. We need to create alternative spaces that are confrontational and about asserting our power.
Direct action is not about being hidden away, believing that other people can speak on our behalf, or that it’s their role to change things. It’s our role to come out and be seen and heard and to say to everyone that, despite what you’ve been told, this is the reality on the ground for disabled people. We don’t get enough space in the media for that counter narrative.
We don’t invite talking heads to our events, we turn the mic to people who show up and invite them to speak about their experience and what they want to happen. There are loads of places people can go to sign petitions etc. There are very few places disabled people can go to say ‘I challenge the government and I take this space’, then suddenly there’s no denying you and you have to be heard.
Find out more about the national protest.
On Twitter: #reclaimingourfutures
Earlier this week DPAC blockaded the BBC
In September last year Professor Gilles-Eric Séralini, a respected French scientist, published the results of the longest running study of Monsanto’s herbicide-resistant 'Roundup Ready' GM maize (NK603) and its associated 'Roundup' herbicide (generic name Glyphosate).
His toxicology results found that these widely available products caused organ damage, increased rates of tumours and premature death in rats. Monsanto’s GM maize is widely used as animal feed in Britain, and a recent study by Friends of the Earth revealed the active ingredient of Roundup had found its way into the urine of people in over 18 European countries. There were now serious emerging questions to answer about Glyphosate and GM technology. Yet the UK authorities responded by either condemning the study – in the case of the almost comically pro-GM Food Standards Agency – or ignoring it.
Several months later, government ministers, led by food and environment secretary Owen Paterson, announced that they intended to force the EU to relax regulations on GM crops. Not satisfied with this bit of promotion alone, David Cameron went on to pledge £395 million from the UK Aid budget to support private initiatives involved in spreading GM crops in Africa.
Why is the government so confident that the UK public will not object to its recent efforts to support GM technology? Partly because very few people in the UK ever got to hear about Séralini’s study.
Monsanto and the other major agrochemical companies have a far-from-pristine record when it comes to playing dirty with critics. Séralini is no exception. Within hours of the study’s release, an orchestrated media campaign swung into action to discredit it.
At the centre of this process was the UK-based Science Media Centre (SMC), an organisation which claims to be independent and to ensure that the public have access to the best scientific evidence – but in reality represents the interests of biotechnology and chemical companies. The SMC quickly circulated highly critical quotes about the Séralini research from scientists who work closely with the biotech industry. Few of these scientists had ever actually conducted a toxicology study.
SMC director Fiona Fox later said that she took pride in the fact that the SMC’s 'emphatic thumbs down had largely been acknowledged throughout UK newsrooms'. Few newspapers had covered the story, and those that did 'used quotes supplied by the Science Media Centre'.
Despite these criticisms of Séralini’s work, the journal in which it was published stood by its peer-review process and refused to bow to pressure to retract the research. However, the damage was already done. The SMC’s efforts ensured that few British people heard about the study and those that did were misled into thinking that the findings were not robust.
Answering the critics
As Prof Séralini arrives on these shores for the first time to defend his work and answer his critics, the claims of the SMC look increasingly fragile. The European Food Standards Agency (EFSA), which has very close links with the biotech industry, was initially highly critical of Séralini’s study. Many were, therefore, surprised when EFSA published guidelines for long-term animal feeding studies designed to assess the toxicity and carcinogenicity of GM crops, effectively validating his methodology.
Séralini’s work showed that 90-day tests commonly done on GM foods are not long enough to see long-term effects like cancer and organ damage. The first tumours only appeared after 4-7 months. In July the European Commission and French government announced that they were commissioning new long-term studies on the potential health risks of GM food and feed.
Prof Séralini spoke to a packed room in Edinburgh yesterday, and free public meetings in London, Manchester and Newport will be happening in the next couple of days alongside discussions with UK, Welsh and Scottish parliamentarians.
The initiative, put together by Citizens Concerned about GM, with support from a range of individuals and NGOs, will also feature some good news from unexpected quarters. Resistance to GM in its birthplace, the USA, is having a renaissance. The founders of Food Democracy Now!, a grassroots movement who are at the forefront of the battle against big agribusiness in the States, have been working with over 650,000 farmers and citizens to challenge the stranglehold of GM and its attendant herbicides.
Come along and decide for yourself.
GM Health Risk week is a week of discussions and debates examining new evidence into the risks GM food poses to human health, the food system and democracy. Internationally renowned scientists and commentators including Professor Giles Eric Séralini will present evidence and begin discussions in locations around the UK. See www.gmhealthriskweek.org for details of your nearest event.
Hilary Wainwright was in the occupied building of ERT 3 in Thessaloniki on the day when the the Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation (ERT) went dark and expressed her solidarity to the workers of ERT 3 who continue to broadcast until today.
'I am here to give solidarity because your struggle is a struggle for democracy in Europe. Your determination to stay in air is a struggle for European democracy, because the end of free speech is the end of democracy' she said.
Read a full report from the June 2013 occupation.
(Video first published at www.afterhistory.blogspot.gr)
(One Man Stop from You and I Films on Vimeo)
Rob's action kicks off a month-long rolling blockade of the fracking site in West Sussex, following last month's Reclaim the Power protest camp.
Get our email newsletter, with news, offers, updates and competitions.
