Nationalist Economics Bulletin, week of November 28, 2005

£. The UK economy continues to sag into recession:

http://www.businessworld.ie/livenews.htm?a=1305772;s=rollingnews.htm

£. One thing slowing our economy down is the ongoing decline of the
North Sea oil fields, which are gradually running out. See our page
on Peak Oil (www.bnp.org.uk/peakoil/index.htm) for the larger
implications.

http://www.shanghaidaily.com/art/2005/11/26/218175/Weaker_oil_product
ion_slows_UK_economy.htm

£. And as our own energy supplies dwindle, our economy becomes more
and more vulnerable to disruptions and price spikes in imported
energy, especially natural gas. As noted before in this bulletin,
the Blair government's current plans would eventually make Britain
massively dependent upon imported natural gas.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/51450.html

£. Chancellor Gordon Brown recently delivered a speech to the
Confederation of British Industry that was a masterpiece of
hypocrisy:

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,16781,1652647,00.html

He waxed eloquent on the need to control inflation, and ignored the
fact that his own government:

1. Fudges the inflation figures by leaving out housing costs, which
have soared.

2. Causes housing costs to soar by allowing a million foreigners
into the country every four years.

3. Cause deflation in wages – which has the same effect on working
people as inflation in prices – by importing cheap foreign labour.

These facts are, actually, well-known to the audience he spoke to,
and so the real message of his speech was in code. It was probably
this:

'Big business should back this government because, despite raising
your taxes, we've made it up to you by giving you cheaper labour,
courtesy of mass immigration.'

This, of course, the deal that the socialist (in aspiration, if not
reality) permanent-government class, as represented by Brown has
worked out with the capitalist class:

`Let us suck a bigger slice of the nation's wealth into the
government we control, and we'll compensate you with cheaper labour
to make up the difference.'

Brown, who is slated to be the next PM but is clearly worried that
the economic slide may dump Labour out of office only a few years
after he gets in, is trying to shore up the fundamental coalition
behind Cheap Labour – sorry, that's New Labour to us peasants –
before the economy gets really bad.

£. Why is Brown trying so hard to hard to patch things up? For one,
his business backers are apparently very annoyed at the Blair
government whose economic policies he heads:

`Looking back over six years, I've never experienced such a feeling
of frustration among the business community," said Sir Digby Jones,
the CBI director-general. "They no longer think the government is on
side for business. I think it's a seminal moment.'
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-1892328,00.html )

Business interests are angry that he has saddled the country with an
11-bilion-pound deficit that will have to be made up with tax
increases:

http://business.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=2313092005

As a result, he's promised them an attack on government red tape
(which won't amount to anything, but it's at least a gesture of
contrition):

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-1892328,00.html

£. The Blair government is also facing public revolt over its plan
to allow public employees to retire earlier than the rest of us, a
blatantly-unfair piece of pandering to the public-sector unions:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
xml=/news/2005/11/28/npen28.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/11/28/ixnewstop.htm
l

£. Some commentators are telling us that the solution to the
pensions crisis is to allow more immigration.

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/comment/article329705.ece

But this is wrong, for two simple reasons:

1. Immigrants will themselves retire one day, so this only
postpones the problem, and doesn't solve it.

2. It has been documented to death that immigrants take more money,
on net, out of the public purse, than they put in. Asylum seekers
on welfare and in council houses are hardly supporting anyone's
pension!

£. Further evidence that British 'liberals' don't care about the
British working class anymore: the Guardian continues to defend the
importation of cheap foreign labour:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1651451,00.html

£. Most of the so-called left in this country has abandoned the
white working class, and is too thick, or too corrupted by ties to
the Blair regime, to grasp that mass immigration is the latest
technique by which a globalist business class, with no loyalty to
the people of this country, pounds wages into submission.

There are a few happy exceptions, however. Although we cannot
endorse their larger Marxist agenda in any way, we must observe that
the Communist Party of Britain Marxist-Leninist, to its credit, has
grasped this truth, as shown by the extraordinarily brave and honest
article reproduced below. To quote:

'Are nations outmoded? Capitalism says so. Once capitalism was the
spur to the building of nations, sweeping aside the localism and
feudal land structures. Now it prefers to create larger economic
bases such as the EU, giving power to the larger corporations,
weakening working class power. Yet as workers we only have Britain,
so we have to save it.'

( http://www.workers.org.uk/features/feat_1105/migration.html )

We couldn't have said it better ourselves. We live for the day when
they grasp that socialism has been tried and found (with some
exceptions, like the NHS) to fail, and that economic nationalism is
the way forward for the working class, and everyone else, in this
country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Copyright 2005 British National Party. http://www.bnp.org.uk
A summary of the BNP's main economic policies may be found here:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/candidates2005/manifesto/manf9.htm
Past BNP Nationalist Economics Bulletins may be found here:
http://www.bnp.org.uk/bulletins/econmaster.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--------

Migration and Class Power

Communist Party of Britain Marxist-Leninist

(This article is an edited version of a talk entitled "Migration and
Class Power", given at a CPBML public meeting in London on 20
October.)

The real purpose of the government's open-door immigration policy is
now clear: to undermine the wages and conditions of British workers.
As a class, we have got ourselves into an awful mess. Of course,
it's not all of our own making. For over three decades, we have been
subjected to an unrelenting, escalating ruling class assault: more
than 30 years of reaction and counter-revolution from our ruling
class, which has pressed down on our daily lives, shattered our
trade union culture and traditions, circumscribed our hopes and
strangled our aspirations.

With only some exceptions, notably the strategic offensive
undertaken by the engineers and others in the 1970s against the
Industrial Relations Act and the miners' stalwart but ultimately
gladiatorial defence of their industry in 1984–85, our class has not
attempted to fend off, let alone repulse, these regressive attacks.

We have seen, in the mere span of a person's lifetime, the situation
in Britain turned dramatically upside down. From the days of the
early 1970s when the media (superficial as always) could
clamour "Who rules Britain?" to now, when capitalism is naked and
callous in its operations, trade unions are studiously ignored and
Big Business is slavishly kow-towed to.

In the 1960s and early 1970s it was possible for Mao Tse-tung to
talk about revolution being the main trend. And though with
hindsight perhaps it was a slight embellishment, you still had a
Soviet Union: not as revolutionary a force as it once was, showing
signs of fraying round the edges and with capitulationist talk
emerging at times from the likes of Kruschev and Kosygin, but still
exerting a restraining influence on the world of capitalism.

The extent of migration What is the scale of the recent migration
into Britain? Official figures reveal the following:

1997 285,000
1998 332,000
1999 354,000
2000 364,000


Obviously the figures do not count any illegal immigration.

In these 4 years alone, before the accession of the new EU
countries, immigration at 1,335,000 exceeded emigration by about
400,000. Since those years immigration has continued to rise. Take
the months between May and December 2004: according to Home Office
estimates about 130,000 nationals from eight of the new member
states alone applied to work in Britain; about 123,000 of them
successfully obtained work permits.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that 223,000
more people came into Britain than left in 2004 (more than double
the annual average from 1997 to 2000). Some 583,000 entered the
country. Separate figures predict the population may increase by up
to 7.2 million over the next ten years.

The number of migrants from Eastern Europe EU member states has
risen dramatically, due to the government's open door policy. The
Home Office admits that 14,000 are now arriving every month from
Eastern Europe (170,000 a year).

It is estimated that anywhere up to 200,000 illegal Turkish Kurds
have entered Britain recently. Of course, if Turkey joins the EU,
then that will all become legal immigration.
Employment

Post-1945 there was not a commitment to full employment: it was
there in reality – or at least capitalism's definition of full
employment, with no more than half a million people out of work at
any time. Even at the start of the 1970s, the unemployment rate (as
calculated at the time, so divide by half to equate with current
figures) was around 3%.

We were in a position to defeat the Labour Party's 1969 attempt to
control unions, In Place of Strife and, in the early 1970s, the
Tories' Industrial Relations Act. If today it was a truce, tomorrow
it could be war.

Workers are thinking beings, and depending on how they think they
may then decide to act or not. Workers do not act spontaneously, nor
do they act responsively, as a result of cause and effect. Actions
and struggle depend on us knowing our circumstances.

In recent years there has been a marked lessening of working class
confidence, clarity of thought and class organisation. Material
factors were at work, the greatest of which was the rundown and
destruction of our industrial manufacturing base.

From 1968 we saw an end to full employment and the re-creation of
the reserve army of the unemployed; anti-trade union legislation and
reduction of trade union strength; deindustrialisation; and the
removal of manufacturing heartlands. Along with this came membership
of the European Economic Community (now the EU), privatisation and,
at the end of the 1970s, Thatcherism.

The latest weapon in the armoury of capitalism is a massive increase
in the numbers of people migrating to Britain. It is not accidental;
it is not without purpose. The EU requires free movement of capital
and labour. This measure benefits capital, while making labour
weaker, more insecure.

The migration attack

Speaking in Bradford in June, the Governor of the Bank of England,
Mervyn King, put it starkly: "Immigration has reduced wage
inflation. The inflow of migrant labour, especially in the past year
or so from Eastern Europe, has probably led to a diminution of
inflationary pressure on the labour market."

Cheap mass labour from Eastern Europe has been used to keep wages
stagnant or reduce them. The real purpose of an open-door
immigration policy is revealed for what it is: to undermine the
wages and conditions of British workers.

Apart from Ireland, only Britain (courtesy of Jack Straw and the
Labour Government) decided from 1 August 2004 to give unrestricted
access to workers from the new Eastern European member states, even
though transitional arrangements allowed restrictions for up to
seven years.


Many of the EU's original 15 member states, including Germany,
France and Italy, still have tough limits on economic migration from
the ten countries which joined the EU last May. Even by the EU's
regulations, countries can apply their own national migration
legislation until at least 2006 and also impose entry quotas in
certain professions. In contrast, the United Kingdom and Ireland
have moved quickly to remove barriers in their labour markets.

Britain already has millions unemployed, however much the government
attempts to reclassify them. This massive influx of labour, often
concentrated in our leading urban conurbations, particularly London,
will have a significant impact on our wages and conditions and on
our creaking services already struggling to cope with needs and
reduced financial budgets. In fact, the impact is already there in
many areas.

Much of our infrastructure was already under great stress and
struggling to cope – schools, hospitals, transport – and now it has
this sudden, unexpected demographic change thrown into the equation.
It is evident in London as you go about daily life.
Take schools as an example. In June 2005, the Association of London
Government published a report entitled "Breaking Point: Examining
the disruption caused by pupil mobility". It points out that
government does not provide any additional resources for schools
with high pupil movement.

High pupil turnover is heavily concentrated in specific geographical
locations (usually where housing is cheaper – generally poorer
areas) and in specific schools. One of the key factors in pupil
mobility is international migration. Many of these children do not
speak English or do not have fluency in the language.

The report notes that the failure to fund pupil turnover means that
schools, particularly those with the additional challenges of high
deprivation, do not have the capacity to meet the true level of need
associated with mobile pupils or existing pupils with diverse
multiple disadvantages. Most rely heavily on staff to provide
support for new pupils by working additional unpaid hours – which in
part reflects a dilution of teaching and learning support to all
children in that school.

Research undertaken by London Metropolitan University in 2002
concluded there were approximately 80,000 asylum-seeking and refugee
children in British schools, with an estimated 62,666 in schools and
nurseries in London. In seven London education authorities, refugee
children comprise more than 10% of the school roll: a significant
concentration. Teachers feel overwhelmed by the numbers of children
without English from so many backgrounds.

These levels of migration if allowed to continue will put massive
strain not just on the fabric of British society but also on its
mental complexion too. A nation must retain the right to control
entry if it is to maintain the glue that holds it together. We wish
to retain an integrated society.

Most migrants to Britain are aged under 34. Research suggests that
many are university educated, prompting real concerns about a brain
drain in the countries they have left. Those coming are attempting
to escape hardship elsewhere. Do they really think it's going to be
easy here? Do they imagine a land flowing with milk and honey? They
are in for a rude awakening.

We cannot tolerate being dragged backwards by certain other groups
of migrants. There is, for example, no place in Britain for African
ritual murders, for devilry exorcism with its maltreatment of
children. We tamed our religion a long time ago, and we shall not
let religion persecute workers again.


What it means to be British

Are nations outmoded? Capitalism says so. Once capitalism was the
spur to the building of nations, sweeping aside the localism and
feudal land structures. Now it prefers to create larger economic
bases such as the EU, giving power to the larger corporations,
weakening working class power. Yet as workers we only have Britain,
so we have to save it.

How do we see the composition of a nation? Immigrants to Britain who
are serious about staying have the same choice as any other British
worker: either join with other workers to improve wages and
conditions, preserve liberties and quality of life or ally with
capitalists. True integration has nothing to do with appreciation of
the national cricket team and warm beer (though many more will be
supporting England rather than Pakistan or Bangladesh or the West
Indies after this summer).

From 1750 to 1840 our class was torn from the land, drawn to the
factories and the towns and thrown into conditions in which survival
was a daily achievement. They could look to no one else but
themselves for protection and alleviation. Without stars, without do-
gooders and without political parties, our class founded its own
bodies to defend and further the interests of its own.

The whole force of the employers' state was brought to bear upon
these emerging working class organisations which, despite
imprisonment, transportation to Australia, penury, acts of
parliament, spies, provocateurs and even death itself, were never
vanquished.

In these years, the British working class first discovered for the
world this absolute truth: the necessity of working class
solidarity, of combination of labour against capital, of trade
unionism.

In contemporary times, have we started to forget, discard, shun or
just fail to apply what we knew – the vital local pride; skills;
communities; brotherhoods of workers; the culture of mutual support?

Guidance for the future
The Labour Party now is trying to preserve capitalism in absolute
decline by elevating the rights of capital above all other
interests. It must be pushed aside.

We must treat the Labour Party with the disdain it deserves – do not
waste efforts over it. Certainly do not attempt to resurrect it as a
true labour party. Do we really want to re-run the setback and
disillusionment and betrayal of the last 100 years?

Let it wither on the vine. It can go the way of the Liberal party
after the First World War and seemingly what has happened to the
Conservative Party after the debacle of Thatcherism. Let the decline
be terminal for them all.

And then our class has to face squarely the conclusion that there is
no way out of their predicament courtesy of one of the bourgeois
parties or through capitalism's representative democracy.


But how to do for ourselves when trade unions have been allowed to
degenerate? Look at class for what it is, not what we want it to be.
Rebuild class organisation again. Explore the experience of the
British working class organisation. Start with the local.

The greatest gift that the British have made to the world is in
ideas: our thinking, our attitude to life. These are largely based
on our response to the material changes of industry, manufacture and
science – raising collective forms of survival in the simple but
stubborn form of organisation: trade unions. We have a way of life
to lose; we have a future to gain.

Those going – 360,000 emigrated in 2004 – have a lack of belief in
Britain. Good riddance! The ones left will be those with sterner
resolution, more mettle, the root and branch.

Cul-de-sacs and the open road

Workers must do for themselves: we are many, they are few. There are
but two classes and class is everything. Without clarity about it we
do not know who we are or what we are doing. We must be in charge of
our professions and protect and develop skill.

We are in a guerrilla war against the capitalist enemy who for the
past few decades has analysed our strengths, largely in manufacture,
largely in trade unions, and been undermining and destroying these
sources of our strength, letting our life-blood trickle out bit by
bit.

How do we break out of their encirclement? We need to know what we
are defending and when. Choose terrain favourable to ourselves,
employ active and passive defence, conserve our strength, and await
an opportunity to defeat the enemy.

Do not underestimate, do not overestimate the enemy: the ruling
class only has apparent strength due largely to our lack of
activity. Developments will occur: if we don't respond, then the
response of the capitalists will simply get more intense. Don't
wait, or there will be worse ahead