In Momentum’s internal war, Jon Lansman has won. The group’s founder and owner has drawn up a hastily-approved constitution, which will force members to join Labour by 1 July 2017 or face expulsion. Lansman’s move is designed to neutralise Momentum’s Trotskyist wing, which has long resisted his reforms. Senior members such as Jill Mountford of the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty and former Militant member Nick Wrack, who are barred from Labour, will be forced out.
Mountford said : «This is a coup. We are not splitting and we are not going to be provoked by this. We are going to call a conference for grassroots activists and we will to seek to reverse these changes. The constitution has been imposed, we are going to continue to fight for a democratic organisation. »
Lansman’s ruthlessness has prompted the rare sight of Blairites praising the veteran Bennite (who I interviewed last year). It was, they wryly noted , the 88th anniversary of Stalin exiling Trotsky to Siberia. «Lansman is behaving like an absolute monarch,» said Richard Angell, the director of Progress.
But despite the coming purge, Labour MPs still baulk at the thought of the pro-Corbyn group affiliating to the party. «I will be opposing this with every fibre of my body,» vowed Tom Blenkinsop. But what are the chances of Momentum being permitted to affiliate? Under the current rules, the answer is non-existent — unless the group changes beyond recognition. Labour’s constitution states that groups which have «their own programme, principles and policy, or distinctive and separate propaganda» or which promote parliamentary or local government candidates (as Momentum does) shall be «ineligible for affiliation to the party. »
It is for this reason that other factions, such as Progress, the old right Labour First and the Bennite Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, are not officially affiliated. It is theoretically possible that the party could change its rules to accept applications from such groups. But in practice it is unlikely that either the NEC or the Labour conference would approve this hazard-strewn move. Even some of Corbyn’s NEC supporters are opposed to Momentum’s affiliation bid.
Were Labour’s rules to remain unchanged, Momentum itself would have to change. It would have to cease to be a pro-Corbyn faction and become a blander socialist society (no disrespect to the Fabians). Rather than a genuine affiliation bid, then, Lansman’s announcement looks more like a symbolic declaration. By stating that he wishes to affiliate, he has made it clear that those who don’t are not welcome.
Today, Open Britain and the Fabian Society have come together to try and answer some of the hard questions Brexit poses for the Left, and to outline the principles that should inform our approach to Brexit, in a new pamphlet. As an MP who campaigned for Remain representing an area that voted Leave I know how important it is for Labour to engage with the outcome of Brexit negotiations to ensure working people’s interests are protected.
It is fantastic that progressive groups are thinking about Brexit and going beyond the platitudes of “red, white and blue Brexit.” That’s why today[s document has been welcomed by Keir Starmer and the Shadow Brexit team and supported by Labour MPs.
Open Britain and the Fabian Society suggest six principles that should government Labour’s approach to Brexit, covering the economy, our foreign and security policies, immigration, the laws that protect our environment and rights at work, domestic economic reform, and the political way forward. This approach is aimed at preserving the best aspects of our EU membership, while respecting the result and tacking the underlying frustrations and pressures that led so many of Labour’s natural supporters to vote to leave the EU.
The greatest threat to working people is the spectre of a destructive hard Brexit, which would impose onerous and damaging tariffs, customs duties and red tape on our exports to, and imports from, the EU. This would mean fewer jobs, lower growth, and higher prices. A full 44 per cent of Britain’s exports go to the EU, making it comfortably our largest trading partner. A progressive Brexit approach to trade should prioritise three strands – continued participation in the single market and customs union, unless it can be proven empirically that doing so will not damage our economy; a rejection of the WTO model, which would dramatically increase barriers to trade; and a transitional arrangement, should one be necessary, to bridge the likely gap between Britain leaving the EU and a new, permanent trading arrangement being agreed.
This must be combined with action on immigration, which was such a powerful driver of the vote to leave the European Union. What the British people want is greater control over immigration without paying an economic cost. This must be our approach too, as we look for a new deal on immigration from the EU that includes, for example, tying free movement to those who have a job offer and arguing for sector-specific emergency brakes that could be applied in cases of identifiable economic stress. It is important to note that The Dutch Deputy PM is calling for reform and David Cameron’s «special status» renegotiation conceded the principle that rules could be altered in response to exceptional inflow of workers causing serious problems. At the same time, however, Labour must not abandon our internationalist, progressive principles. We should continue to welcome the immigrants our economy needs, and stand up for the European Union citizens who are already resident in this country, and now find their rights under threat.
Another priority must be an approach to security and foreign policy that keeps our streets safe and prevents strategic shrinkage. We should seek to maintain our current level of co-operation with Europe on security, including British participation in the European Arrest Warrant, Europol, and databases such as the Schengen Information System. At the same time, we must seek to prove to allies in Europe and the United States that we remain a serious partner on the world stage. That means maintaining the 0.7 per cent target for international aid spending, leading action against climate change, and continuing to play a full role in Nato, including maintaining the 2 per cent of GDP funding target.
One of the great achievements of the single market, one that has not been fully appreciated by some, is the swathe of common rules that protect workers, consumers, and our environment. Labour must stand for the maintenance and advance of these standards, and fight ceaselessly against the Tory instinct to seek a competitive advantage in making Britain the Sports Direct economy of Europe. While this future might appeal to some business tycoons, it would be a grim future for working people.
Tackling the root causes of frustration and alienation, especially in Labour communities, must be spearheaded by changes to our domestic economy. Action to rebalance our economy in favour of working people – through more training and skills funding, greater investment in regional economies, worker participation and a focus on exports – is long overdue. This will, however, be undermined without urgent action to replace the EU funding streams that currently benefit deprived areas of our country.
And ultimately, this whole approach must be undertaken in a spirit of consultation and consent that has been lacking from the Government. Parliament must be involved not grudgingly but willingly, by putting down a detailed plan before the House of Commons and accepting that MPs must vote on the triggering of Article 50. The devolved administrations, as well as local government leaders in the English regions, should be given a seat at the top table, rather than the occasional unenlightening meeting with David Davis.
Others will have their own valuable ideas about Labour’s response to Brexit. What is needed now is policy detail within the context of the enduring Labour values of equality and social justice, coupled with a commitment to human rights and internationalism. When the Prime Minister presents her «plan» there must be a credible Labour alternative – today marks the start of putting one together.
Phil Wilson MP is a leading supporter of Open Britain
© Source: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/01/will-momentum-be-able-affiliate-labour
All rights are reserved and belongs to a source media.
共産党の第２７回党大会が１５日午後、静岡県熱海市の党研修施設で開幕した。次期衆院選に向けた野党共闘について、 志 位 和 夫 委員長は「後戻りすることは決してない。いつ衆院解散となっても勝利するため共闘態勢をつくり上げる」と強調。野党統一候補の相互支援構築と共通政策の合意を目指す考えを示した。また、民進、自由、社民３党の幹部が初めて出席してあいさつし、共闘強化に前向きに取り組む考えをそれぞれ表明した。 
民主化勢力が政権を握ったミャンマーで、言論の自由が脅かされる懸念が出ている。アウンサンスーチー国家顧問率いる与党の政治家や軍首脳をネットで批判しただけで、逮捕されるケースが相次ぐ。国内外から出ている批判に対して、政権側の動きは鈍い。 ヤンゴン郊外のタクシー運転手の男性（３７）が昨年１１月、電気通信法違反（名誉毀損（きそん））の疑いで逮捕された。フェイスブックの投稿が、与党・国民民主連盟（ＮＬＤ）の地元下院議員らの名誉を傷つけたとの容疑だった。 警察に告発したのは、ＮＬＤ地区組織幹部のチョーミョースエ氏（４４）。男性の「私たちの議員は能力がなく、誠実さにも欠ける」との投稿が名誉毀損だとする。議員らに告げず、自分の判断で告発したという。 男性の妻（２９）によると、男性はフェイスブックに政治や社会問題に関する批判をよく書き込んでいた。「民主化したので何を書いても大丈夫」と話していた。男性は保釈が認められず、勾留されたままだ。 告発には、ＮＬＤ内部からも「投稿は単なる批判。司法手続きは中止されるべきだ」（別の地区組織幹部のアウンミン氏）との声が上がる。だが、チョーミョースエ氏は「目上の人に敬意を払わず、根拠もなく自由に批判できるのはおかしい」と訴える。 適用された電気通信法は、旧軍政の流れをくんだテインセイン前政権下で２０１３年に制定された。ネットを使った恐喝や名誉毀損、脅迫などは懲役３年以下に処するとの条項がある。 この条項は言論弾圧の道具と批判されてきた。名誉毀損の定義が曖昧（あいまい）で被害者以外が告発でき、保釈が認められにくい点が問題とされる。刑法にも名誉毀損罪があるが、量刑は禁錮２年で、保釈も可能だ。 電気通信法改正を訴える組織を立ち上げた詩人でＮＬＤ党員のサウンカさん（２３）によると、ＮＬＤが政権交代を決めた１５年の総選挙の運動期間中に前大統領や国軍最高司令官を揶揄（やゆ）した活動家らが、この条項で逮捕された。サウンカさんも逮捕された一人で、懲役６カ月の判決を受けた。 逮捕は昨年３月末に発足したＮＬＤ政権下でも続き、前政権下の２倍超となる少なくとも１６人。最高司令官を「恥知らず」と書いたＮＬＤ党員のほか、スーチー氏を「侮辱」したものも４件あるが、訴えたのは「被害者」の本人以外。サウンカさんは「スーチー氏や議員を告発で守り、英雄になろうとの風潮がある」と話す。
運転開始から４０年を超えた関西電力高浜原発１、２号機（福井県）の運転延長をめぐり、原子力規制委員会の審査対応をしていた同社課長職の男性が過労自殺した問題で、厚生労働省福井労働局敦賀労働基準監督署が関電の岩根茂樹社長を出頭させ、全管理職の労働時間を適切に把握するよう求める指導票を交付していたことが１５日分かった。関係者が明らかにした。 労働基準法上の「管理監督者」は労働時間の制限を受けず、残業代の支給対象外で、労務管理がおろそかになりがちだとされる。一般労働者でなく、管理職の勤務実態の調査を求めるのは極めて異例。大企業のトップに長時間労働の見直しを直接要請した形で、「働き方改革」を進める厚労省の強い姿勢が示された。 福井労働局で６日、手渡した。関電は過去２年にさかのぼり全管理職の労働時間や持ち帰り残業時間を調べ、労基署に報告する。同社は「指導を真摯に受け止め、引き続き適正な労働時間管理に努めたい」としている。 男性は４０代で管理監督者に当たるとされ、昨年４月に自殺。１カ月の時間外労働が最大約２００時間に及んだこともあり、１０月に過労自殺として労災認定された。 続きを読む
President-elect Donald Trump signaled Friday an openness to upending existing foreign policy on Russia and China, suggesting in a recent interview the possibility of lifting Russian sanctions and doing away with the “One China” policy. 
07:24 ET 
January 15, 2017
Beijing on Saturday warned the US that the One China policy was non-negotiable, after Donald Trump suggested he could abandon the decades-old diplomatic principle and boost ties with Taiwan. 
Prince Charles has co-authored a Ladybird book on a hurdles and probable solutions to meridian change. 
MEDFORD, N. Y. (CBSNewYork) — A suspect is in the hospital after being shot by police following a wild car chase overnight in Suffolk County. 
