Buy Balls to go British (National Party)
Back to school for Mr Balls
“I know, like most of my fellow citizens, that I am British before I am European.” So sayeth Ed Balls, reminding us why no socialist would ever support such a pseudo-nationalistic pap-spouting twit. These words were printed in the Observer today, amidst lamentations that so many Eastern Europeans were allowed into the country.
In a few short paragraphs, Ed Balls fails to recognise the importance of Labour’s single great achievement of their first term – the minimum wage. While calling Eastern Europeans hard working, he attacks them for undermining British wages, whilst saying that British migrants elsewhere in Europe are much higher up the payscale.
There is a second economic and political challenge for Britain and Europe: how to sustain EU integration and enlargement in these difficult times. Free movement of goods and services works to our mutual advantage. But the free movement of labour is another matter entirely.
There have been real economic gains from the arrival of young, hard-working migrants from eastern Europe over the past six years. But there has also been a direct impact on the wages, terms and conditions of too many people – in communities ill-prepared to deal with the reality of globalisation, including the one I represent.
What dreary, worthless nonsense – with the exception of saying that Eastern Europeans might be hard working it could have come from any of our right wing parties. Instead of condemning the employers who would pay low wages, the corporations which specifically lock Eastern Europeans into a cycle in which they get union wages but lose deductions for mandatory food, heat, light, accommodation, transport etc, Balls goes after people who just want a bloody job.
Instead of demanding a government which will pursue a living wage, or the repeal of legislation which makes ‘closed shop’ union practices illegal – something that would, if handled correctly, allow for greater worker participation in macro-decision making whilst protecting terms and conditions, Balls’ says we should keep out the Turks, Romanians and Bulgarians.
Disgraceful – and to think that a sizeable chunk of the Parliamentary Labour Party support this idiot! They need to be reminded that while open borders will not solve the problems each of them fear, solving those problems will lead to open borders. Those problems are problems of labour organisation.
seriously, no one in england will vote for a Prime Minister called Balls, face the facts, socialism has failed and bankrupted the country, both financially and spiritually
time to move on
The fact is Edd reads into what he thinks the people want to hear, they have no policies, one of these morons sent me an email saying back me, we need to fight welfare reforms, his bloody reforms, but I should come back to labour vote for him, and he will fight what the policies he brought in.
Socialism is about fairness, people who come from poor countries we need to help, but New labour will ask somebody how much money have you got, the rich are welcome, if your poor starving or dying piss off.
New Labours policies are piss poor, for me they are better off in opposition out of the way.
And i spent a wasted 40 years in labour.
Rob, this is a line you’ve repeated over dozens of my blog articles – now on Left Futures as well as here at TCF. You say that Labour are better off in opposition – but do you have an alternative? If so, you’ve never voiced it.
Sorry, are we labouring (excuse the pun) under the false pretense that this Labour party is Socialist????
We haven’t had a real socialist party for… oh wait, yeah, that’ll never be allowed.
As a LibDem I’d say please choose Balls he could make Labour unelectable for a generation, except there’s no place in progressive politics for views like that.
This country, and every country for that matter, needs a strong and vibrant Labour movement with political representation and, although I’m of a different persuasion, I look on with dismay at Unions that seem to have retreated into being lobby groups and a pasty pink with pale blue stripes party that treats the left with disdain whilst searching for some mythical populist centre.
Well Dave,
Here you have it: “Free movement of goods and services works to our mutual advantage. But the free movement of labour is another matter entirely.”
You were wrong when you denied that Labour had an unpublished plan to use immigration to change the social fabric of Britain. And you are blind now if you can’t see that governments today only favour the free movement of labour when it suits the interests of capital.
http://moneycircus.blogspot.com/2009/10/wont-retire-cant-migrate.html
I apologise in advance if it seems like I’m being a bit slow on the uptake but how does any of what Balls said, or your linked-to article, indicate ‘an unpublished plan to use immigration to change the social fabric of Britain’?
And I know the government favours the free movement of labour when it suits the interests of capital – I’ve said the same thing before myself, many times. Probably every time this subject comes up.
If Balls says that we should keep Turks, Romanians and Bulgarians out, he is talking nonsense. Bulgaria nad Romania are EU members, Turkey is not. As a result, Romanians and Bulgarians will be able to work in UK without any restrictions from January 1st 2014, no matter how much Balls want to keep them out. Turkey is another story.
Hehe, I like your pseudonym – apt. I think what Balls was talking about is a renegotiation of the deadline for excluding potential immigrants from the newer EU countries – and for holding out on Turkey’s admittance on this basis (though if I remember correctly Balls also does the traditional pivot to human rights etc).
Regarding the renegotiation of the deadline for Romanians and Bulgarians, Balls is either deluded, or lying through his teeth. In any case Balls is not fit for a PM.
Renegotiation is not possible, not a single EU country has done it so far, and is very hard to justify why a small section of EU countries should have their citizens treated as second class citizens in Britain, beyond the agreed deadline of seven years.
But this raises some other issues:
Firstly Romanians and Bulgarians are used as scapegoat of the immigration debacle. Romanians have not and never would immigrate en masse in UK. The number of Romanians coming to UK is less than 8000 a year and most of them return back to Romania after a few years. Labour wants to show their voting base that they are doing something against immigration. Instead to tackling the non-EU immigration, which represents probably 80% of immigrants coming to UK, they use Romanians and Bulgarians to show how tough are they on immigration. This is a lie. EU citizens are not immigrants within EU borders, they have the right to work and settle whenever they fancy within Union. Nobody consider and treat Britons as immigrants in Spain or France, so why Romanians and Bulgarians should be treated as immigrants, worse, as undesirable immigrants. They are EU citizens and they should have the same rights as any EU citizen after the commonly agreed deadline.
Secondly, anyone showing with good reason that most immigrants originate outside the EU would be taxed as racist. To avoid accusation of racism, the blame is put on Romanians (or some generic Easter Europeans) for the whole immigration mess and associated problems. This policy is laughable especially as the number of Romanians permanently settled in Britain is low, around 25000. The rest are temporary, either seasonal (SAWS scheme) or leaving after 3-4 years. The number of Bulgarians is even smaller, so there is no justification for the treatment both countries are currently subject to.