neoliberalism

You are currently browsing articles tagged neoliberalism.

By Valerie Zink
Briarpatch Magazine
November/December 2010

This summer marked the 75th anniversary of the Regina Riot, a landmark in the history of Briarpatch’s hometown and an event with political reverberations well beyond the city itself. On June 3, 1935, at the height of the greatest crisis of capitalism in the country’s history, 1,200 striking workers departed relief camps in British Columbia aboard eastbound boxcars to deliver demands for employment and fair wages to the federal government of R.B. Bennett. Eleven days into the journey, the On-to-Ottawa Trek was met with RCMP blockades in Regina. After two weeks of failed negotiations, city police and mounted RCMP officers charged the crowd of Trekkers with baseball bats and billy clubs, sparking one of the most violent episodes of the Great Depression. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , ,

illustration by Trevor Waurechen

illustration by Trevor Waurechen


By Sarah Mann
Briarpatch Magazine
November/December 2010

Globalization has propelled neoliberalism across borders, not just as an ideology or system of commerce, but as the primary determinant of the daily realities of where people live, what they eat, how they work, and what rights they enjoy. The deregulation of economies in the service of free trade – be it the reduction or elimination of taxes and tariffs, the weakening of employment and environmental standards, or the privatization and outsourcing of social services – continues to displace and disenfranchise people across the globe. Moreover, the perennial competition to attract capital has pushed employers to divest themselves of accountability for the rights and needs of their workers, creating an increasingly insecure and exploitable workforce in the service of business elites. Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , ,

welfaresmallgrey1

illustration by Ben Clarkson

By Aleksandra McHugh
Briarpatch Magazine
November/December 2010

The dream of a benevolent welfare state may live on in social work theory, conference papers and mission statements, but as far as front-line bureaucracy goes, welfare is dead. Only its image remains, as faint as chalk on a sidewalk. No longer even pretending to be a right or social safety net, social assistance has mutated into a series of manipulative tactics to prod and intimidate its clients into jobs that no one wants. In other words, welfare has become workfare.
Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , ,

A home in the Lower Ninth Ward being rebuilt by Common Ground Relief volunteers. (Photo: Sara Falconer)

A home in the Lower Ninth Ward being rebuilt by Common Ground Relief volunteers. (Photo: Sara Falconer)

By Sara Falconer
Briarpatch Magazine
November/December 2009

It’s not easy getting a cab to the Lower Ninth Ward. Even now, with most of the former population cleared out, some drivers still won’t cross the Claiborne Avenue Bridge unless it’s to take a carload of tourists to gawk at Hurricane Katrina’s Ground Zero. So when the third cab stops, it’s with some impatience that I ask if he knows the way.

“Oh sure, sweetie,” he drawls. “Born and raised. Born and raised.”

Norman is a retired firefighter who now drives cab to supplement his pension. Four years ago, after Hurricane Katrina, he patrolled the flooded streets by boat to pull survivors from rooftops and attic windows. When he learns that my companion and I have travelled from Toronto to volunteer with a grassroots rebuilding project called Common Ground Relief, chatty Norman gets very quiet. He reaches over, turns off the meter and looks at us intently. “I want to show you something,” he says.

Although it’s late, he drives several blocks past our destination, his headlights occasionally framing the sagging ruin of a house or an exposed foundation, the structure either washed away or bulldozed by the city. He distractedly points out the levees where the water first broke through, just steps from these front doors. Finally he stops at a cheery bungalow, its porch light blazing, a tidy little oasis of normalcy in the darkness.

“This is my home,” Norman says, his gruff voice choked with emotion. “Volunteers rebuilt it for me.”

He hopes his return will encourage his neighbours to come back too but there is much that stands in their way. With their homes and jobs long gone, we wonder, what incentive is there for anyone to return? And how much of a difference can small groups of parachuted-in volunteers make when there is such substantial work to be done?

The jarring reality, we will soon discover, is that volunteers like us are, unwittingly, at least as much a part of the problem as a part of the solution. Real change in New Orleans – the kind that will give the rest of Norman’s community a reason to return – is going to require solidarity of an entirely different kind. It’s not the “thousand points of light” feel-good charity work that Bush (senior) championed. Rather, it’s the rebirth of a civil-rights-era approach that put thousands of activists on the front lines of struggles, in direct confrontation with the State.

Since 2005, much of the city has been rebuilt, particularly in the wealthy Garden District and French Quarter. The Lower Ninth Ward, though, remains a wasteland. Of the 19,000 people who lived there when Katrina hit, only 3,600 have come back. Many of the rest have been mired in red tape trying to access insurance or relief funds for so long that they can no longer afford the trip home. The city seems to actively discourage resettlement, routinely levying large fines against absent homeowners for infractions such as excessive grass length, eventually going so far as to expropriate and demolish the offending homes.

The intentional displacement of low-income communities from this area is nothing new, says Jay Arena, a long-time activist in the fight to defend public housing in New Orleans, both before and after Katrina. “The city had wiped out half of the public housing even before the storm,” he explains, from 14,000 to 7,000 units during the 1990s and early 2000s. In 2008, under the guidance of the Bush (junior) administration, the Housing Authority of New Orleans (HANO) destroyed another 5,000 low-income apartments. Charity Hospital, providing care to tens of thousands of uninsured, was also shut down – all part of a push to replace public services with for-profit ventures.

“It’s about dismantling the public sector and letting charity groups address the ensuing social ills,” Arena fumes. “That has been the neoliberal agenda of the elite, local and national, post-Katrina.”

Arena is critical of the role of non-profits, foundations and universities in underwriting that agenda. With the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) poised to destroy public housing (which they label “concentrated poverty” to justify their efforts to eradicate it) across the country, New Orleans became the latest victim of an all-out offensive on the public sphere – a political and economic onslaught that swept the Global South in recent decades, under International-Monetary-Fund-imposed austerity measures, and that is now coming home to roost in the Empire’s backyard.

As Naomi Klein reports in The Shock Doctrine, only days after the hurricane struck, the Heritage Foundation, a prominent right-wing think tank, released recommendations for rebuilding the city on a privatized model. Among 32 changes that were quickly implemented by the Bush administration, the Foundation urged a disinvestment in the public school system. Vouchers are now issued by lottery to allow a limited number of low-income children to enroll in private school, leaving other students on waiting lists or simply languishing in underfunded public schools.

Meanwhile, thousands of families who used to live in public housing now live in privately owned apartments, paying more than 30 per cent of their income towards the rent and utilities that HANO’s “Section 8″ vouchers fail to cover. “These were plans they had already drawn up,” Jordan Flaherty, a former union organizer and editor of Left Turn magazine, tells Briarpatch. “The storm was their opportunity.”

“What happened with Katrina is not just an attack on poor folks, but also an attack on black political power in the city,” he says. “Pre-Katrina, the teachers’ union was the largest and most influential in the city, and a source of middle-class black political power. After Katrina, everyone who worked in the school system, from janitors to teachers, was fired, and the union contract was cancelled.”

That shift in political power has also been evident in the changing demographics and political representation of the city, as the majority black city council was slowly replaced by a majority white council.

Arena suggests that despite the best of intentions, the thousands of student, faith-based and other volunteers who still flock to the city to gut and rebuild houses actually contribute to the neoliberal project of dismantling the public sphere. “We have Habitat for Humanity building a few private houses, while thousands of public homes are being destroyed,” he points out.

Similarly, Teach for America volunteers were brought in to fill the positions of unionized teachers who were fired, while volunteer health clinics now care for some of the thousands of patients abandoned by the closing of Charity Hospital. Describing the same trend in her native India, Arundhati Roy has called this phenomenon the “NGO-ization of politics”: “[Non-governmental organizations'] real contribution is that they defuse political anger and dole out as aid or benevolence what people ought to have by right” (Public Power in the Age of Empire, 2004).

Such volunteerism, Arena points out, is also a form of scabbing that drives down wages for workers. “These are jobs that could be performed by Katrina survivors who desperately need them,” he says. Louisiana’s unemployment rate, at six per cent, is still the lowest in the country, but is rising quickly, with 15,700 jobs cut in the last year as the recession began to take its toll on the state. Despite the potential jobs that construction could offer, most new houses are prefabricated out of state and shipped in, using local labour for only a few days at a time.

Meanwhile, the over 130,000 people who were displaced from New Orleans have had to seek work in other cities, particularly Baton Rouge, Gulfport-Biloxi, Mobile and Jackson. Many of these workers abandoned their skilled professions to work as cab drivers, short-order cooks and other low-paid positions. The “right of return” movement championed by grassroots community groups like C3/Hands off Iberville, with which Arena was previously involved, advocates the creation of jobs and the repair and expansion of public infrastructure to enable the displaced to come home.

Arena believes that some developers have been “icing out” black workers from what little construction is actually taking place, pitting migrant Latino workers against black locals. C3/Hands off Iberville is demanding the enforcement of Section 3 of the 1968 Housing Act, which stipulates that on HUD-funded construction work, at least 30 per cent of jobs must go to local workers. “This is by no means an anti-immigration campaign,” he says. “We’ve been fighting for a public works plan that would be open to all – documented, undocumented. There’s plenty of work to be done.”

The New Orleans Workers’ Center for Racial Justice (NOWCRJ), an advocacy group formed in the aftermath of Katrina, echoes Arena’s concern that black workers were “locked out” of the rebuilding process while immigrant workers were “locked in” by companies that falsely promised them security and permanent status for their sacrifices. NOWCRJ aims to organize across race and industry lines to build political power, encouraging the inclusion of labourers, guest workers and homeless residents in campaigns against inter­national human labour trafficking, for the protection of day labourers engaging in dangerous work, and more.

Both Arena and Flaherty agree that such movement-based volunteerism, rooted in the civil rights tradition, is key to the solution. It is true solidarity, rather than the “thousand points of light” variety of volunteerism, that is needed, Arena says. “In the midst of this whole assault, we’ve had more than a million people come to the city [to volunteer]. We would have preferred to see people come down and support the struggles for public housing and public services.”

A failed attempt by the AFL-CIO to unionize hospitality workers several years before Katrina demonstrates the importance of taking cues from local leadership in establishing such solidarity, Flaherty adds. “If you’re not doing something with the guidance of those most affected, it simply won’t work.”

Make no mistake: volunteers are needed in New Orleans. Its poorest residents – and some of the most vibrant, warm and strong people you will ever meet – have been abandoned by a city and a society that is being deliberately rebuilt without them. But misguided efforts to help only mask the sources of their suffering. With “solidarity, not charity,” as a mantra, there is an opportunity for visitors who really want to make a difference to lend their time and skills to support grassroots groups that are taking a stand against a system of exploitation.

Order this issue.

Subscribe to Briarpatch Magazine.

Subscribe to Briarpatch digital edition.

Tags: , , , ,

Neoliberalism isn’t dead – it’s just resting

By Simon Enoch
Briarpatch Magazine
November/December 2009

With the Financial Times lamenting the “end of the era of liberalization” and the “death of global free-market capitalism” and Newsweek declaring “we are all Socialists now,” one could be forgiven for believing that the worst excesses of neoliberalism have been relegated to the dustbin of history. But for all the talk of resurgent Keynesianism, reports of the death of neoliberalism – the pathological fear of all things public and the idolatrous worship of the market – are greatly exaggerated. While the advocates of free-market orthodoxy have remained uncharacteristically quiet during the current economic crisis, neoliberalism has merely gone underground, biding its time until it can resurface with renewed ferocity.

Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , ,

This from a baffling front-page story in The Nation , Thailand’s English-language business daily — a stunningly inane piece of neoliberalese trumpeting a "big-bang" deregulation of capital markets as the solution to the global economic crisis:

The ‘big bang’ plan would lift the capital market’s role in developing the economy as a whole and linking the market with the public and become a major funding source for business operators," [Thai finance minister Korn Chatikavanij] said.

The phrase "big bang" is used in reference to the sudden deregulation of financial markets. The Thai version would cover seven areas:

  • The capital market’s structure would be revised to lift its competitiveness.
  • All securities businesses would be liberalised, which would affect securities services, licensing and commission fees.
  • Good-governance practices must be strengthened.
  • The legal structure would be changed in a way that provides a greater chance for small investors to protect themselves.
  • The tax structure would be revised to get rid of discrepancies, as the capital market covers life insurance, bank savings and investment in bonds or equity.
  • New projects would be introduced, such as property funds, infrastructure funds and state enterprises that are privatised.
  • There must be measures to develop the bond market.

It’s hard to know where to start with this, but I must say I admire the audacity of the attempt to spin the privatization of state enterprises as the "introduction" of "new projects."

Tags: , , ,

Watch this. Implausible and funny.

Read this.

Excerpt: “The entire world is currently spooked by the Argentine ghost. Even if wealthy countries reach out to ailing nations, some governments will not survive the storm. Even this would not be truly dramatic. But if the industrialized nations then decide to leave the threshold countries to their own devices, the ensuing wildfire will burn indefinitely.”

Watch this again. No longer implausible. Still funny?

Tags: , , , ,

By Dawn Paley
Briarpatch Magazine
November 2008

Canada is very close to jumping into bed with one of the worst human rights violators in the hemisphere, and almost no one seems to have noticed. Negotiations for the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement were concluded on June 7, 2008. Ex-foreign affairs minister David Emerson made the announcement unexpectedly, on a Saturday, even before the Standing Committee on International Trade had finished deliberating as to its merits. Talk about a shotgun wedding.

The hasty marriage is part of Canada’s “renewed engagement” in the Americas under the direction of the Harper Conservatives. The agreement with Colombia has elicited criticism from diverse sectors in both countries. Though the agreement’s details have not yet been made public, it will likely mirror Canada’s recent deal with Peru, which contains investment protection guarantees for Canadian corporations operating in Peru as well as lower tariffs for Peruvian exporters. The Canada-Colombia deal is currently delayed by the Canadian election.

Labour groups in Colombia see the deal as a serious blow to Colombia’s economic prospects. Colombia’s economy will improve only after a strong internal market has been developed in which Colombian needs are met by Colombian products, says Gustavo Triana, vice-president of the Central Union of Workers (CUT), one of Colombia’s largest unions.

“The increased arrival of food and products from other countries because of free trade agreements increases unemployment, hurts our economy and lessens our quality of life,” Triana told Briarpatch from Bogotá.

The federal government’s Standing Committee on International Trade published a report on the deal a week after negotiations ended. The report included eight recommendations, the second of which “recommends that the Government of Canada maintain close ties with Colombia without signing a free trade agreement” until major advances are made in Colombia’s handling of human rights, labour rights and the environment. The Conservatives, however, distanced themselves from the report, which was endorsed by the other parties. Though Stéphane Dion has recently voiced his opposition to the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, it is unknown how the Liberals will react if the agreement is tabled and the legislation brought to a vote.

South of the border, George W. Bush and the Republicans have pushed unsuccessfully for a free trade pact with Colombia. On April 10, 2008, Bush submitted a proposal to Congress but the Democrats wouldn’t co-operate, in part because of pressure from the American labour movement, which demands reductions in labour rights violations and an end to the assassinations of Colombian trade unionists.

Enter the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, just in time to breathe new life into the stalled U.S.-Colombia deal. As University of Toronto professor John Kirton told Bloomberg in May, the eventual signing of a Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement “will give aid and comfort to all the liberalizing forces within the United States who are instantly going to notice it and say ‘if the Canadians are doing Colombia, why can’t we?’”

In Colombia, organizing can be deadly

Canadians concerned about respect for human rights have good reason to oppose a trade deal with Colombia. Human Rights Watch characterizes Colombia as the country with the “worst human rights and humanitarian situation in the region, with many serious problems, including massive internal displacement, killings, and enforced disappearances.”

After three years of collecting and analyzing evidence in Colombia, the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal – an international organization descended from the International War Crimes Tribunal founded by Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre in 1966 – announced its verdict on the complicity and sometimes active participation of multinational corporations in human rights abuses in Colombia. The tribunal found that the country’s union movement has been the victim of “genocidal practices” including massacres of union members and a concerted attempt to “liquidate” Colombian trade union members.

The result has been a precipitous decline in union membership. According to the union’s president, Tarisco Mora, the CUT had 1.5 million members at its founding, a number that has since fallen to 460,000 due to legal challenges to unionization and violence against union members.

This violence has been both widespread and systematic. According to Colombia’s National Trade Union School, there have been 2,245 killings, 3,400 threats and 138 forced disappearances of trade unionists over the 15-year period between January 1991 and December 2006.

Consequently, trade union members represent only a fraction of working Colombians. Triana notes, “It’s important to understand that there is a complete disregard for labour law in Colombia, and the vast majority of workers – around 80 per cent – work on informal contracts and have no right to unionize.”

A September 15th strike exemplifies the problem. Striking sugar cane cutters and plant workers in southern Colombia – workers who are not unionized, but who are supported by the CUT – were attacked by Colombian National Police’s Mobile Anti-Disturbance Squad (ESMAD). More than 33 workers were wounded. Radio and TV stations broadcast messages on behalf of plant owners stating: “striking won’t bring solutions, it will only bring unemployment” and “don’t allow your husbands to participate.”

The number of union members killed in 2007 dipped slightly, but according to the National Trade Union School, “the lessening of the deaths and the increased protection of union members in Colombia has converted itself to a political strategy for the discussion of Free Trade Agreements, and is not about sincere concern for the defence of life and the rights of workers.” Indeed, Colombian unionists fear that once free trade deals are signed, the crackdowns will reintensify. From January to September 2008, 41 Colombian unionists were murdered.

These crimes are often committed with impunity, a point that Maria McFarland Sánchez-Moreno, a senior researcher with Human Rights Watch, raised in her testimony before the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade in June: “the rate of convictions for unionist killings has been consistently low, all the way through 2006: there were nine convictions in 2003, 11 in 2004, nine in 2005 and 11 in 2006.”

In 2007, that number spiked to 43 convictions, mostly “due to pressure from the United States Congress in connection with the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement,” Sánchez-Moreno testified. “But once the pressure is lifted, the administration of President Álvaro Uribe will lose its main motivation for supporting the investigations.” Sánchez-Moreno urged Canadian lawmakers not to enter into a trade agreement with Colombia.

Decades of labour solidarity

Co-operation between Canadian and Colombian unions goes back at least 20 years. According to the Canadian Labour Congress’s Sheila Katz, “Colombia has, for at least two decades, been the focus of trade union solidarity because the Colombian labour movement has been the target of right-wing violence generated by the ruling class and its allies in government.” The CLC has produced research on human rights abuses in Colombia, launched letter-writing campaigns and organized protests in Canada, and assisted Colombian trade unionists with complaints before the International Labour Organization.

The CLC and the New Democratic Party have been two of the main organizations campaigning against the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement, though their campaign has not yet gained momentum outside of the union sector. One of the key thrusts of union campaigning so far is drawing attention to what the NDP has dubbed a “kill a trade unionist, pay a fine” clause to be included in the agreement. The proviso would require the Colombian government to pay a token monetary sum into a “co-operation fund” administered by the Colombian government whenever a union leader is murdered – a policy that critics decry as a normalization of such assassinations.

As part of a CLC-supported fact-finding mission, leaders from Canada’s four major federal public-sector unions – CUPE, CUPW, PSAC and NUPGE – visited Colombia in July of 2008. At the end of their trip, the union leaders released a statement that read, “Our overwhelming conclusion is that a free trade agreement will not help the Colombian people. It will only exacerbate an already horrifying list of human and labour rights abuses that are shocking the world.” There was no mainstream media coverage in Canada of their tour.

Free trade agreements in the U.S. and Canada

In the United States, the push for a free trade agreement with Colombia is a contentious issue. Opposition comes mainly from unions and a diverse coalition of citizen-based groups that oppose such a deal.

“Not one labour, environmental or faith organization supports the Free Trade Agreement with Colombia,” says Andrew Gussert, national director of the Citizens Trade Campaign, a coalition of labour, environmental, religious, family farm, and consumer organizations in the U.S., representing more than 14 million people.

“When a member of Congress gets a call from a steelworker, a teamster, the head of the local Sierra Club, a priest, and the head of a local farmer’s union who disagree with the FTA, it has an impact,” Gussert told Briarpatch. Gussert points out that similar pressure urgently needs to be applied in Canada if the Canadian deal is to be stopped.

Continued opposition from the largest labour groups in the U.S., supported by many other sectors of American society, has kept the pressure on Congress to maintain its opposition to an agreement. Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reiterated the lack of support for the agreement in Congress on June 29: “There is widespread concern in Congress about the level of violence in Colombia, the impunity, the lack of investigations and prosecutions, and the role of the paramilitary. Issues of this nature cannot solely be resolved through language in a trade agreement. . . . Consequently, we cannot support the Colombia FTA at this time.”

In Canada, the issue is not nearly as contentious. When asked how the CLC would campaign on the issue through the election period, Katz responded, “The Colombia trade deal per se is probably not going to be a major issue in the election. But we are trying to get some of the leaders to mention it in their speeches and of course get questions fed into all-candidates meetings.”

Gustavo Triana of the CUT plainly states his opposition to the deal: “Free trade agreements are not good for people.” Whether this sentiment is held widely enough to keep the Canada-Colombia deal from being implemented remains to be seen.

Dawn Paley is a contributing editor with The Dominion, and is based in Vancouver.

See also: “Liliany Obando: Profile of a jailed Colombian dissident.”

Order this issue.

Subscribe to Briarpatch.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Economics for Everyone
A short guide to the economics of capitalism
By Jim Stanford
Fernwood, 2008

Reviewed by Nick Bonokoski

The day after I was assigned this book review, I was talking with two friends, Derek and Corbin. Lehman Brothers had just gone bankrupt and Merrill Lynch had been bought out by Bank of America. Derek was somewhat upset by all the coverage he had seen about this. “The Dow is at its lowest in six years,” he complained. Corbin replied, “Since 2002? I don’t remember things in 2002 being all that bad.” The following week I was talking to a co-worker about this and she said, “2002 was awful.” Her husband is a financial adviser. Those conversations amount to a confirmation of one of Jim Stanford’s key points: everyone has a different stake in how capitalism works.

Stanford’s Economics for Everyone does for economics what bell hooks’ Feminism is for Everybody did for feminism. In her book, hooks makes the point that everyone has an interest in the struggle to end white supremacist capitalist patriarchal oppression. Similarly, Stanford makes the point that everyone has a stake in understanding how capitalism works and working to reform and/or overthrow it.

Stanford’s book allows readers to develop their understanding of economics through concrete examples of how capitalism affects their lives. He asks readers to begin by taking a walk through their neighbourhood and asking some basic questions. What kind of work is happening in your neighbourhood? Who is doing it? Who is benefiting from it?

Focusing the bulk of the book’s introductory section on the concept of work is an effective way of allowing people to develop a concrete understanding of capitalism by connecting it to their everyday experiences. Stanford makes it clear that the sum total of our everyday work (paid and unpaid) makes up what is called the economy. Workers, paid and unpaid, need to understand how our work fits into the capitalist economy to understand the pressures that can worsen their working conditions, as well as what leverage they have for improving their working/economic conditions.

Economics for Everyone is the cornerstone of an ambitious educational project that aims to provide working people with the opportunity to develop a nuanced understanding of capitalism. The book’s website (www.economicsforeveryone.ca) provides extra resources and lesson plans that social justice groups and community activists can adapt to their purposes, thus further democratizing the study of economics by putting the tools of analysis into readers’ hands.

Economists mystify the economy. The study of economics has become so mystified that the fact that there are other viable economic models besides capitalism isn’t even on most people’s radar. To address this deficiency of options, Stanford concludes by outlining some socialist alternatives to capitalism. He points out, importantly, that socialism will only come about through struggle, analysis, experiment, organizing, and lots and lots of hard work.

Economics for Everyone is a great example of just the kind of hard work needed to generate the class consciousness that can challenge capitalism’s grip on our economy and our imaginations.

Nick Bonokoski works for the Saskatchewan Union of Nurses, is a member of CUPE 3761, does social justice work inside the labour movement, wants to do more social justice work outside the labour movement, and is trying to finish his M.A.

Tags: , , ,

By George Monbiot
The Guardian

August 26, 2008

The world’s hungriest are the losers as an old colonialism returns to govern relations between wealthy and poor nations

In his book Late Victorian Holocausts, Mike Davis tells the story of the famines that sucked the guts out of India in the 1870s. The hunger began when a drought, caused by El Niño, killed the crops on the Deccan plateau. As starvation bit, the viceroy, Lord Lytton, oversaw the export to England of a record 6.4m hundredweight of wheat. While Lytton lived in imperial splendour and commissioned, among other extravagances, “the most colossal and expensive meal in world history”, between 12 million and 29 million people died. Only Stalin manufactured a comparable hunger.

Now a new Lord Lytton is seeking to engineer another brutal food grab. As Tony Blair’s favoured courtier, Peter Mandelson often created the impression that he would do anything to please his master. Today he is the European trade commissioner. From his sumptuous offices in Brussels and Strasbourg, he hopes to impose a treaty that will permit Europe to snatch food from the mouths of some of the world’s poorest people.

Seventy per cent of the protein eaten by the people of Senegal comes from fish. Traditionally cheaper than other animal products, it sustains a population that ranks close to the bottom of the human development index. One in six of the working population is employed in the fishing industry; about two-thirds of these workers are women. Over the past three decades, their means of subsistence has started to collapse as other nations have plundered Senegal’s stocks.

The EU has two big fish problems. One is that, partly as a result of its failure to manage them properly, its own fisheries can no longer meet European demand. The other is that its governments won’t confront their fishing lobbies and decommission all the surplus boats. The EU has tried to solve both problems by sending its fishermen to west Africa. Since 1979 it has struck agreements with the government of Senegal, granting our fleets access to its waters. As a result, Senegal’s marine ecosystem has started to go the same way as ours. Between 1994 and 2005, the weight of fish taken from the country’s waters fell from 95,000 tonnes to 45,000 tonnes. Muscled out by European trawlers, the indigenous fishery is crumpling: the number of boats run by local people has fallen by 48% since 1997.

In a recent report on this pillage, ActionAid shows that fishing families that once ate three times a day are now eating only once or twice. As the price of fish rises, their customers also go hungry. The same thing has happened in all the west African countries with which the EU has maintained fisheries agreements. In return for wretched amounts of foreign exchange, their primary source of protein has been looted.

The government of Senegal knows this, and in 2006 it refused to renew its fishing agreement with the EU. But European fishermen – mostly from Spain and France – have found ways round the ban. They have been registering their boats as Senegalese, buying up quotas from local fishermen and transferring catches at sea from local boats. These practices mean that they can continue to take the country’s fish, and have no obligation to land them in Senegal. Their profits are kept on ice until the catch arrives in Europe.

Mandelson’s office is trying to negotiate economic partnership agreements with African countries. They were supposed to have been concluded by the end of last year, but many countries, including Senegal, have refused to sign. The agreements insist that European companies have the right both to establish themselves freely on African soil, and to receive national treatment. This means that the host country is not allowed to discriminate between its own businesses and European companies. Senegal would be forbidden to ensure that its fish are used to sustain its own industry and to feed its own people. The dodges used by European trawlers would be legalised.

The UN’s Economic Commission for Africa has described the EU’s negotiations as “not sufficiently inclusive”. They suffer from a “lack of transparency” and from the African countries’ lack of capacity to handle the legal complexities. ActionAid shows that Mandelson’s office has ignored these problems, raised the pressure on reluctant countries and “moved ahead in the negotiations at a pace much faster than the [African nations] could handle”. If these agreements are forced on west Africa, Lord Mandelson will be responsible for another imperial famine.

This is one instance of the food colonialism that is again coming to govern the relations between rich and poor counties. FULL ARTICLE.

Tags: , , ,

« Older entries