Gordon Brown has ruffles feathers after speaking about the possibility “last resort re-nationalisation”
The depth of the cost of living crisis is such that ideas only months ago were dismissed as “too radical” are suddenly back in fashion. The nationalisation of the energy companies is one of them.In Jeremy Corbyn’s time as leader, right wing Labour MPs dismissed their own party’s policy on the question as a throwback to the 1970s and unfit for the modern age.
A “properly regulated” free market was the only efficient way to supply households with electricity and gas, they insisted.But the sheer scale of household energy price rises has forced some to think again. Former Labour prime minister Gordon Brown this week decided to join in.
He said that the government should regulate the energy firms more tightly.And, “if this fails, as a last resort, operate their essential services from the public sector until the crisis is over.”Though he doesn’t use the word, Brown is saying that some energy firms should be re-nationalised. Brown’s apparent U-turn comes not because the arch centrist has discovered socialism.
We should remember that he was Tony Blair’s “Iron Chancellor” and presided over colossal privatisation projects, including in the NHS and on the London Underground. The conversion comes because there are times when vital industries are so threatened and the risk of popular rebellion so high that even sections of the ruling class can favour state ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange.
That, after all, is how gas and electricity utilities—and many other industries first came into the public sector in 1948. In the wake of the Second World War British industry was battered, desperate and on its knees.
Only the government had the degree of centralised planning and resources necessary to rebuild it. The capitalist class were, in most cases, prepared to allow nationalisation of these assets because they believed it would help bring stability to the economy.
They saw that the cost of the modernisation of industry would be borne by the public. This form of nationalisation also encouraged a sense that “we’re all in it together”. Both the government and the bosses hoped it would mitigate against the deep pool of class bitterness that followed the war.
It is in this same spirit of “national unity” that Brown has offered his policy of a last resort re nationalisation of the energy industry. He hopes that capitalism today can be stabilised using a series of emergency measures that interfere with the market, but only temporarily.
It’s what Brown did as prime minister during the 2008 banking crisis to bail out the system. He interfered with private banks to save their system. They were part-nationalised and then handed back later.
Whatever the limitations in his plan now, Brown has certainly ruffled the feathers of Labour’s most right wing figures. Having fought off the challenge of Corbyn, they see the re-emergence of his policies as a grave danger. However, there are ways to favour nationalisation that are far better than Brown’s.
When the demand for state ownership comes as part of a mass movement or from workers in the industry, it can be part of a more radical vision of how society might be run. Fundamental to this is demanding the end of the rule of the free market.
Taking the energy industry under temporary government control until the current storm of high prices passes is a long way from a plan to wrestle control of society from the rich. Far better than a windfall tax, we could seize the entire assets of firms such as Shell and BP and invest them in a low cost, fossil fuel-free future.
We could democratically decide ways in which to cut energy usage, and how to prioritise ecologically sustainable power generation. And, rather than overpaid bosses, workers in the new nationalised industry would run the firms themselves but be accountable to wider society.
This vision of nationalisation has nothing to do with those that want to stabilise capitalism. Instead, it aims to destroy and replace the system with something far better.
Wildcat strikes—purrfect way to claw back workers’ rights
Wildcat strike by oil refinery workers blocks the road in Grangemouth, Scotland. (Picture: Twitter)
As the cost of living surges, wildcat strikes are back. An increasing number of workers are downing tools to rage against the bosses. The term “wildcat strike” is used to describe a workers’ strike that bypasses the limitations of the trade union bureaucracy and the Tories’ oppressive anti-union laws.
Instead of waiting to go through the process of negotiations, indicative ballot, strike ballot and then waiting for strike dates, a wildcat strike is where workers act immediately. Most importantly it is action that rank and file workers push from below.
Amazon workers who took part in wildcat strikes last week showed that they could do just that when they refused to accept a pay rise of just 35p. These strikes have spread to other Amazon “fulfilment centres” but it’s not just Amazon workers taking action.
Construction, oil refinery and other workers are coming together and participating in wildcat strikes, demonstrating a radical mood to fight back immediately. These strikes should be celebrated and encouraged to spread.
The distinction between what is “unofficial” and “official” has often been blurred. One example was a series of powerful unofficial walkouts at Royal Mail in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Often these would be over outrageous disciplinary moves by management.
Workers didn’t want to wait for ballots—they wanted the decision reversed immediately. And they often won very quickly.
Formally the walkouts were utterly spontaneous and nothing to do with the union. This was so they could avoid punishment under the anti-union laws.
But anyone who knew anything about what really happened was aware that the better union officials sometimes played a role. This was known as giving a “nod and a wink” to the rank and file.
Often workers take unofficial action alongside official action. This was especially true in the 1970s.
The workers’ revolt at Amazon keeps spreading
Read More
In 1973 Colin Barker wrote in International Socialism journal, “The building workers’ strike in 1972 was turned into a national strike by unofficial action. In varying degrees, the same was true of strikes in the docks, at Ford, in the Post Office and the local authorities. In each case, the leadership was forced into giving official approval by a rising swell of unofficial action and the threat of ‘loss of control’.”
The most important lesson that wildcat strikes teach us, is that workers can organise themselves. Workers can use their knowledge to decide what to do, where to protest, who to contact about joining strikes and how not to get sacked. They can develop new tactics to fight, as they are the ones who truly know the best way to slow down production.
Building rank and file organisation and control of workers’ strikes terrifies the bosses. And it is through participation that workers’ confidence and ideas to win can grow.
A wildcat strike by refuse workers at Welwyn Hatfield Borough council managed to oust a manager that staff said was a sexist bully. Now workers say they have the confidence to strike for better pay.
For non-unionised workers, wildcat action raises the issue of what comes next. For some that will be signing up with one of the established unions.
That may provide protection and an existing layer of support. But it can also extinguish the element of raw anger and struggle. The union can mould the activists to its way of organising rather than the activists continuing to call the shots.
On other occasions, as at Amazon in the US, workers set up their own union. As Tory rules push working class people to the brink, every strike, whether official or wildcat, must try and replicate the militancy the wildcats have shown.
Posted in Comment | No Comments »