We need a peoples budget! Monday 24 January 2022

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) has issued an appeal for the widest possible united anti-austerity socialist challenge at the local council elections scheduled for 5th May 2022.

Launching the appeal, the TUSC national chairperson Dave Nellist, a Labour MP from 1983-1992, said: “As every day goes by, it becomes ever clearer that the Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer will not provide alternative anti-austerity policies to those the Johnson government is seeking to implement to make working class people pay for the effects of the Covid crisis, through cuts in public services, wage freezes, and rising prices and taxes”.

“In the polls taking place next May, in which over 6,500 council seats are up for election, while there may be a handful of Labour candidates still defending the anti-austerity policies that Jeremy Corbyn supported, voters in the vast majority of cases will have no choice other than that between different varieties of austerity politicians – unless fighting trade unionists, socialists, and working-class community campaigners get together to offer a united, anti-austerity alternative at the ballot box”. Full article on the national TUSC website

Meantime could you:

1. Join the national mailing list
2. Donate to TUSC https://www.tusc.org.uk/donate
3. Join and share regular posts from our acebook page ‘Southwark TUSC’
4. And seriously think about standing for and with TUSC, have a look at these key points

433 Download how TUSC function and key policy points

The individual candidates and different organisations appearing on the ballot paper under the TUSC name and logo will almost certainly campaign for and promote far more issues than those covered in the core policies agreed for each election. That’s what being a coalition is about.

But what they will all do is fight to implement the core policies. Voters will know the minimum they can expect from any representative elected under the TUSC banner.

Thanks for support & what do will be doing next now the Tories are in…

Dear Supporters A HUGE thanks to everyone who has voted for us locally and gave support and financial assistance in our anti austerity campaign against cuts & for a socialist alternative in Bermondsey and Old Southwark. It was a lively campaign, with a small team, but growing interest and links which we aim to develop  in the coming months as we fight off the vicious Tory attacks that are being planned. We were also surprised at the outright victory of the Tories, most of us expected some coalition. However reading through the results across the UK, of the 15% lost Liberal votes, less than 3% went to the Tories or Labour and a worrying number went to UKIP. The SNP took over 3%  and a growing number went over to the Greens. They were all seen as anti austerity and providing voice for working class people. Though both the Greens and SNP, have also implemented cuts where they have been in power and UKIP support welfare cuts and much more. As a Lewisham Trade Unionist & Socialist Coalition candidate & NUT NEC Martin-Powell – Davies stated:“Balls, Milliband, Murphy and the other New Labour failures have performed a miracle – for the Tories that is – by handing power back to Cameron. When the exit polls suggested that, despite five years of cuts and attacks, Cameron might be re-elected, even the establishment politicians themselves couldn’t quite believe it. There is understandable fear and anger about what this General Election result could mean in terms of further attacks on benefits and welfare, further cuts and privatisation to schools and the NHS and a further strengthening of anti-union laws, to name just a few. Assisted by media ‘guidance’, the pro-business politicians who dominate New Labour thinking will probably draw all the wrong conclusions and decide that they must turn even more to the right. Yet the Election results show that, if you want to defeat the Tories, you need to promise to oppose cuts, not to ‘balance the books’. Witness how the SNP, posing as an anti-austerity party, opposing Trident and privatisation, almost swept the board north of the border. The Greens, given national publicity that was denied to TUSC, also picked up votes in the same way.” Martin, as well as hundreds of the TUSC candidates, election agents and activists will continue to fight in their local communities, trade unions, as well as politically under the umbrella of TUSC. We will review how the local and national campaigns developed, what active support we can draw on to challenge the mainstream argument for cuts and further austerity. We’ll do this alongside raising our sights for a decent homes, job and services for all of our communities. Our VOTE Kingsley Abrams gained 167, Nick Wrack 292 and Steve Nally 248, who covered the smallest constituency with parts of Southwark and Lambeth. Each candidate had its own team and we did this on a shoestring, no paid staff etc. This compares to Labour who brought over 1000 people  to campaign for them mainly in Bermondsey  & Old Southwark. As you’ll know TUSC stood over 130 general election candidates across the UK and hundreds in local elections. With one  18 year old in Coventry getting a fantastic 400 votes  and Dave Nellist ( a former MP on a workers wage) got 1,769. We got over 3000 votes in Doncaster, Liverpool, Manchester and Sheffield. And just over 2,000 in Sheffield, Barnsley and Kirklees. Portsmouth saw more than 1000 votes, as did Plymouth, Stoke on Trent and Knowsley. In total we had over 108,000 votes, which isn’t a bad start!  It was  a noticeable difference in the votes we gained in local elections compared to general elections.   See TUSC for a fuller report – http://bit.ly/1cUZK0s So what did we do locally? We were able to print and distribute over 80,000 flyers, 50k of those should have been delivered by Royal mail to households. The rest, we targeted 3 of the wards in the area, as well as public leafleting at tube stations, schools and shopping areas and places of work. As ever we attended the picket lines, several local housing protests and campaigns we would normally do outside of election time but tried to ensure we brought the wider political alternative of TUSC to those events. We also banner dropped at roundabouts, bridges and basically anywhere we could!  We attended 6 hustings meetings but were excluded by final ones organised by churches, which was deeply unfair. Reports from the Pensioners group and Southwark Group of Tenants Organisations  are on the website With some last minute additional funds we were able to arrange a bus with Lewisham TUSC to pass through some areas of the borough and got some thumbs up and good responses to the messages against cuts and for Rent Control, house building and  £10 national minimum wage. More photos on the rest of the site. One thing I noticed was that  in the last 4 weeks and after the election broadcast  there was a growing interest, recognition in what we wanted to achieve, to voice an alternative to the cuts, raise our heads for a decent National Minimum Wage of £10per hour and most popular of all was the call for rent control and council house building. We appreciate every one of our modest votes. While the main parties do all their campaigning through the bosses’ newspapers and TV networks, we are kept limited to the absolute legal minimum coverage. Though I found a way to get our Mug our ‘The last leg’, the night of the election and found support from Sandra on Googlebox.. I’m no Labour fan but it was good to see Simon Hughes lose a seat he has held for over 30 years. He has continued to accept and support the bedroom tax and tuition fees and worked with a government that sees over 7000 locally forced to use food banks as rents rocket and income is squeezed or withdrawn through benefit cuts, sanctions and job losses. Labour MP Coyle sadly has also voted through cuts locally, so we don’t hold much faith in him representing and speaking out for us. Thats why, more than ever, trade unions need their own political voice –  TUSC is jam packed with trade union activists and representatives.  Both myself and Kingsley Abrams are  part a Unite branch and this week we recommitted ourselves to challenge austerity,  unanimously requesting the union to endorse a trade union elected candidate who supports the policies of Unite for mayoral candidate –  against cuts and for rent control, council house building, a fully funded NHS. We also have a motion up for Unite rules conference in July, to open the political funds of Unite for candidates that support Unite policy. Anyone in Unite please do ask your branches and delegates to the rules conference to back this motion.  Sign up to show your support here – http://bit.ly/1Hj3e9H But TUSC is not going anywhere.  We will continue to patiently (& sometimes less so) build up a track record of presenting a genuine anti-austerity alternative in elections and campaigns. We are a coalition of  organisations — like transport union RMT and the Socialist Parties and networks — with a proud and ongoing record of successful action against cuts and privatisation. Don’t forget the Tories only got 24% of the electorate’s vote, that’s less  than 1% more than in 2010! What Next? We’ll be in touch very soon about any public meetings and protests we’ll be involved in and we’d ask you to send any feedback you have. Meantime: Join a union in your workplace or get active in it. Join and get active in tenants’ associations and community campaigns — and organise with us to fight these cuts Sign up to the national TUSC email newsletter here to keep in touch with the wider campaigns and updates http://www.tusc.org.uk/support.php Arti Dillon (Election agent for Kingsley Abrams) Full TUSC results from Bermondsey to Dundee

Looking ahead after a great campaign

Update from one of our sister campaigns in Waltham Forest.

Rent Control in Waltham Forest: Vote TUSC

Thanks for all your support!

After Labour’s meltdown – fight back against the Tories by building TUSC  

After a really excellent campaign our results are:

Nancy Taaffe in Walthamstow – 394 votes

Len Hockey in Chingford – 241 votes

We distributed well over 100,000 leaflets, had dozens of volunteers helping us campaign on the streets or bundle leaflets or raise money, and had thousands of conversations. “I see you everywhere” said many when they came across our pink flashmobs around the borough! And the pink is here to stay – this campaign was always a step towards something bigger, building for the future.

These are modest votes. We believe this reflects mainly the campaign of fear by the mainstream parties leading people to think they had no choice but to vote purely on who they would prefer to be prime minister. The on-going battle for every ounce of media coverage…

View original post 244 more words

Football – Some questions answered

1.       What policies will you implement to get more people playing football; including investment in facilities, improved coaching and football in schools?

The huge amount of wealth in football should be used to address increasing participation, improving community facilities and providing coaching training for young people — not for the profit of a few rich owners.

2.       If your local supermarket is too expensive, you can choose another. The same rules don’t apply to football – your club is your club – yet nine out of 10 fans feel that football is too expensive. Do you think that politicians have any role in making football more affordable for the average supporter and if they do, how would you go about this?

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition is opposed to the huge commercialisation and profit motive in football. Working-class supporters are being priced out involvement in their clubs. We stand in opposition to this. Like in wider society, we believe that football should not be run for profit but should be both an affordable form of entertainment for working people and vibrant community hubs. We support the capping of ticket prices at an affordable level agreed with supporter’s groups and back the Twenty’s Plenty campaign.
Many of our candidates are low-paid workers and understand the day-to-day struggles of ordinary people, we don’t have any big business backers — and wouldn’t want them — and our candidates pledge to take a worker’s wage to truly be representative.

3.       Match-going fans and the majority of professional clubs in England & Wales now back safe standing. Would you work with supporters and the football industry to introduce a safe standing pilot?

We support the introduction of safe standing in the countries football stadia and would back any moves to bring in or pilot schemes in the areas our candidates stand and, if elected, in government. As socialists, trade unionists and campaigners embedded in our local communities, we would work with any supporter organisation looking to defend and extend the rights of ordinary fans.

4.       In recent years we’ve seen a number of significant issues that have affected supporters adversely – in relation to locality, kit colour, the club’s name, and more. What mechanisms would you put in place to ensure structured engagement with supporter organisations so that supporters are appropriately consulted prior to such moves being made?

We stand shoulder to shoulder with those opposed to the takeover of clubs by rich individuals or companies. We opposed the move of Coventry City, the name change of Hull City, the kit change of Cardiff at the whim’s of their owners (to name a few) and support the fan-led campaigns which have fought against these top-down changes. We are strongly in favour of supporter involvement and ownership of football clubs and would back (and initiate) campaigns and legislation to return clubs to their local communities at root and also support fan representation and consultation on club decisions.

5.       Would you legislate to improve the game’s governance and its relationship with Supporters including giving supporters representation in football clubs’ boardrooms?

TUSC supports fan representation on boards. We believe that fans, as the heartbeat of football clubs, should have the greatest say in how their clubs are run and would discuss, legislate and campaign alongside fan bodies for greater representation.

6.       The last coalition Government committed to addressing supporter ownership. What would you do to help fans overcome the obstacles to supporter ownership?

We are in favour of supporter ownership and the various models provided by the likes of FC United of Manchester and Wimbledon. Our candidates would work with supporters groups to overcome the obstacles of fan ownership and campaign both practically and financially to make it a more realistic prospect for groups to take on.
The fit and proper persons test for club ownership is not good enough and the government should legislate against millionaire backers and in favour of supporter and community ownership. We would support and fight for any scheme that took clubs in to public ownership and assisted representative groups of fans and communities in their running and development.

7.       The Premier League’s broadcast rights for the period 2016 to 2019 are expected to surpass £8bn. How would you work with them to ensure that an appropriate proportion of this is distributed to the benefit of grass roots football, supporters, and community groups?

There is a huge amount of wealth in football, we believe that money should be ploughed back into grassroots football and used to build strong community-based clubs.
The income generated from the Premier League’s broadcast rights should be put back into grassroots football, tickets price reductions and increasing community involvement in the sport. We don’t agree with the out-of-touch salaries of players and the extortionate transfer fees and would oppose any moves to use the broadcast money to further boost these already inflated areas.

8.       What would you do to help ensure that football is accessible to all – regardless of age, disability, gender, race, faith, sexual orientation or any other identifying feature – and that the make-up of football governing bodies is reflective of society as a whole?

Our candidates have been involved in campaigns against discrimination up and down the country, in their workplaces and local communities. We support and moves to increase the participation of minority groups in football. Money and resources should be put towards increasing participation amongst these groups and helping to provide an inclusive and accessible environment for all fans.

9.       Can Government play a role in creating a successful England team?

Increasing investment in grassroots football, increasing participation, boosting club academies and introducing salary and transfer capping would all help build a successful England team. The FA should be using it’s power and resources to implement change instead of cowering to the wealth of the Premier League. In government, we would support, call for a campaigning FA that puts fans, communities and players back at the heart of football’s decision making and would invest in accessible sport for young people.

10.    Do you have any other policies of view on the state of football in 2015 that you would like to convey to members of SD and FSF

As already stated, our members are ordinary workers, many are fans of their local clubs and understand the difficulties faced. We are standing in these elections to show that their is an alternative to the austerity promised by all the main parties. We believe that society’s resources should be used for the benefit of ordinary people and not for the benefit of the few at the top. This policy translates to football, we stand against the wealthy taking over the people’s game to profit from it and will support any moves against the commercialisation of the game.

Look forward to hearing your views.

Some photos from our Campaign

Do we support tighter rules on media ownership and full implementation of the Leveson report?

Do we support tighter rules on media ownership and full implementation of the Leveson report?

Thank you for getting in touch to publicise to Election candidates your concerns about the lack of real press freedom in Britain and the undue influence that press barons like Rupert Murdoch can exert.

I completely share your concerns. The 2015 World Press Freedom Index put the UK only in 34th place. The ‘Murdochgate’ scandal helped to expose the close links between David Cameron and News of the World editors but also between Tony Blair and Murdoch too. Just recently, Richard Desmond announced he was donating £1m to UKIP, a Party that likes to pretend it isn’t part of that establishment.

These links are designed to bind together the political parties with the interests of the wealthy super-rich. Their ranks have swelled by another 13 billionaires in the last year according to the latest Sunday Times rich-list – and they say ‘we’re all in it together’!

Of course, it is made very clear to those Party leaders that if they speak out against those big business interests, they can expect to be silenced or attacked in the press. TUSC, as a Party campaigning against the austerity policies of big business and their establishment parties, is itself a victim of the lack of genuine media freedom. With 135 candidates standing in the General Election, well over the legal threshold for ‘fair coverage’, we have been largely excluded from much of the media, opinion poll forecasts and, of course, the leadership debates.

Despite this, our 280 seconds of Party Political Broadcast, backed up by the campaigning we are doing in towns and cities across Britain, has already helped to break down the barriers put up to hide our alternative voice from voters. Our policies for decent homes, wages and services chime with people’s views and mean our support is growing all the time.

The pledge in our broadcast from TUSC candidates, including Dave Nellist and myself, to be a ‘workers’ MP on a worker’s wage’ also wins support. It is a policy that hopefully reassures voters that TUSC’s elected representatives will remain committed to the people that backed them, rather than being persuaded otherwise by the press barons.  For Dave, when he was an MP,  it meant he took less than 50% of an MPs wage and the rest was put into campaigns.

TUSC would certainly support tighter rules on media ownership and legislation to support, at the very least, the full implementation of the Leveson report. However, I believe the fundamental problem is not one of poor regulation, but that the media is almost entirely owned by big business individuals and conglomerates. As a journalist once put it in a letter to Der Spiegel, ‘Press freedom is the freedom of 200 rich people to express their opinion’. 

A genuinely free press requires substantial media resources to be made available for genuine public use, under public ownership, control and accountability. I would support all political parties and trends being granted access to the media, perhaps in proportion to their support in the population as shown in elections. Then we would start to have a media that can provide accurate information and quality investigative journalism, one that can be accessed by minority points of view not just those of the establishment political parties.

 

 

We support the campaign for £10ph National Minimum Wage

Our reply to the excellent petition that started up less than 4 days ago with over 30,000 signed up !http://www.thepetitionsite.com/635/840/664/10pounds/

We fully support the campaign for £10 an hour national minimum wage and it is one of the 3 local issues we are trying to raise and push for.

Both myself and Arti (my election agent) are actively involved in a Unite branch and brought the issue to the be fully agreed there too. We have taken part in Fast food rights campaigns and the international day of action on the 15th of April, which saw actions in 5 cities across the UK and walkouts and strikes in the US.

In the US $15 per hour was campaigned for by socialist candidate now elected by working with unionised and non – unionised workers and the community and  built a real grass roots network which challenged low pay. They now have $15ph agreed in Seaatle and its infectious energy and methods are growing across the US and the globe. http://www.kshamasawant.org

Our supporters, like yourself, have also pushed for the Trade Union Congress to support the demand for £10per hour. Housing costs rise, evictions are at record figures and we need to pay our community properly, not poverty wages which then means people have to claim benefits which basically subsidize low pay employers.

We’d love it if you wanted to get involved with TUSC and our campaigns before and after the election. We will fight cuts but also raise demands for £10ph as the money in society does exist but is being accumulated for the less than 1%. The largest property developers since 2010 have had profits rise by 557%, they also hold enough land for over 1 million homes. Yet there is a housing crisis, there is growing insecure work with poverty pay. We say this austerity/cuts and privatisation is a transfer of wealth from the 99% of us to the less than 1%.

Find out more about us on this website, twitter or call. The TUSC broadcast can be found here too, which gives you a picture of why we are standing and for what. https://southwarktusc.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/tusc-on-tv-ok-youtube-now/

And the election flyer that we hope reached you.

Look forward to hearing from you and seeing you soon.

Kingsley Abrams

Stop the cuts in Further Education – Join the protest tomorrow!

We support and will campaign for a fully funded further education sector the announcement of 24% cuts will be devastating to those who use and work in the sector. This is on top of a 32% cut since 2010, meaning over a million student places will be stolen from us the 99%, to pay for the crisis caused by the 1%.

In Southwark we have just heard about another possible 100 job losses at the LESECO college and we will take part in the protest tomorrow alongside staff and students.

If the £120 billion corperation tax was collected, that could pay for the deficit, if that was the reason for all the cuts. We feel it is an excuse to further privatise our collective resources whilst the rich are getting richer.

Grey power challenges ALL the main parties – Report from Bill Mullins

Bill Mullins attended the Southwark Group of Pensioners Hustings meeting:
To say the meeting was lively is to understate it. It was clear that the people in the audience where absolutely pissed of with the main parties election promises.

One woman called Simon Hughes a liar when he said the lib/Dems would put £8 billion onto the NHS.  She waved sheets and sheets of paper which she said was the evidence of the growing involvement of private profit seeking companies in the NHS She said that the libs had voted to accept every single on of them.

Neil Coyle (Labour) attacked Hughes over the NHS under the coalition government but as people in the audience said “you started it with PFI”.

One of the most important debates was over immigration, the UKIP speaker (himself from an BME background) claimed that the NHS was being “swamped by 300,000 immigrants every year” even the green objected to this vicious attack she said “its disgusting what the ukip say about immigrants’,  she went on to explain how the NHS is stocked with staff from overseas including “33% of the nurses and 50% of the doctors”.

I pointed out from the floor that the migrants are young and are far more likely to put more into the NHS with their taxes than to take out. Kingsley repeated this point and accused both the coalition and Labour of being responsible for the crisis in the NHS because of their austerity cuts.

Kingsley explained to the meeting that TUSC opposes all cuts and calls for a mass council house building programme. He said that none of he main parties had an answer to the  housing crisis whilst they support the big developers social cleansing of Southwark.

He added that the coalition government had already cut NHS spending dramatically including cutting £128 million in Southwark alone.

Another big issue for local people had been the closure of the Maudsley mental health facilities in Denmark hill where anybody who had specialist mental health problems in the past could walk into. That is no longer the case and they are told to go to the  A and E instead which is total inappropriate for the needs of people with mental health distress. Simon Hughes said he opposed the closure but blamed the NHS rather than government cuts!.

I was able to challenge the main parties over their allowing the massive tax avoidance by the corporations, saying the PCS union estimates that this was in the region of over £150 billion a year. more than enough to cover the budget deficit of £90 billion.

Report from Bill Mullins (TUSC supporter from Socialist Party)

Simon Hughes on food banks suggest they are double counting those who use it!

Lively Southwark Group of Tenants Organisations (SGTO) hustings last night with Kingsley speaking, Simon Hughes, Tory and Cllr Richard Livingstone instead of Neil Coyle) etc.

Both Hughes and Tory STILL argue bedroom tax is necessary and good idea! Hughes also had disturbing cheek to challenge the foodbank figures rather than acknowledge the devastating impact of all these cuts. Hughes may be ‘nice’ and local, as many people note but hell I’d rather a ruff and tumble representative than one that accepts and deals out these attacks on our lives. Did I mention the Tory didn’t know that disabled people were paying 9 times more into the ‘deficit’..

As one speaker noted, when Hughes and Livingstone spoke, there was no real nods or agreement but frowns, frustration at the lack of choice to us all. ‪#‎TUSC‬ is a new coalition but with YOU we could make a world of difference!‪#‎NoCuts‬ ‪#‎GE2015‬

Kingsley Abrams (TUSC/LU) spoke about defending and extending council housing, challenging the right to buy as it rid us of housing stock. He also challenged UKIP and the others over  immigration becoming the solution when really affordable house building could take place. He challenged the social cleansing, class cleansing, ethnic cleansing of the area and to cheers  stated ‘affordable’ is an abuse of the english language. The UKIP candidate spoke about ability to build council housing but didn’t actually make any promises to do so. Nor challenge the welfare cuts but again they provided the immigration caps solution. Nationally they have already identified £30billion cuts.

A young woman standing as an independent felt that young people were less engaged, decisions every few years not enough. She suggested using newer technologies to vote. Challenges Bedroom Tax etc but wants those effected to make decisions. arguing ‘Make politics a habit’.  You could question who would you educate, who would be educated, and how. Its an interesting suggestion that does try to solve lack of engagement but doesn’t consider that trade unions in particular, already vote for everything. We vote whether we should vote for action, for resolutions, to donate funding etc…As well as, if our representatives FAIL to act on what they agree, they causes a lack of engagement in the mainstream political process.

Hughes was his usual charming, mild-mannered happy chappy self.  He thanked the SGTO doing a great job, though I’m sure the SGTO would prefer him to sign up and join campaigns rather than just speak like this at election time? He reported that the Liberals want 300k homes a year and to give councils choice over Right to buy and new developments must be 35% affordable? Noting that 70% local developments were not applying policy.

He was in government though, am sure the government could implement or ‘sanction’ those councils if they really had the will to provide council housing. He reported that Heygate agreements were replace council stock exactly BUT also build additional affordable homes. This is not what the Labour council did.

Again I don’t recall them making an issue over this with the residents? The offer of a loan of £2k for rentals could look good, but at what cost? And does this bring the monthly costs of renting down? We’d say rent caps, in fact rent CUTS.

A few questions were allowed, though lots of people had comments and challenges to make particularly to those who had held some political power. Hughes was challenged about the increased use of Foodbank across country. He began by challenging the figures, not acknowledging the scale and depth of the debt. Stating GP referred people to Foodbanks as if that was done willy nilly and not for those in need?! Many heckles and frowns of frustration expressed.

Hughes was also asked of the 2 million jobs he stated were created how many of those were living on the poverty line? Why were over 50% of those on HB in Southwark working? Benefits subside landlords and low paying employers. Livingstone replaced Neil Coyle on behalf of Labour, stating it was  the most important election since 1979 in terms of council housing.. Record homeless and growing list of needing homes. 4k badly effected by the Bedroom Tax and Labour would get rid of the Bedroom tax.. oh lord you hear some of us sigh, you implemented it here! You put 1000’s of  us through excess paper work and stress and increased debt…why didn’t you do anything before?!

Labour also added a cap on benefits in previous governments and have publicly said they would be tougher on welfare. Livingstone, bizarrely challenged Hughes and the Libdems for facing both ways on housing, at one point agreeing with what the council were doing then against it. ‘At least the Socialist Party criticisms are coming form an honest place’.

One tenants organiser challenged Bedroom Tax (Hughes still supports the idea) noting how he and wife who were pensioners were paying disabled sons charge to ensure he could live and have some food on the table. Shamelessly, Hughes still did not back down on the idea, nor did the Tory I spoke to at the end. She clearly had NO idea of what was going on or the empty properties around. A growing number as over 50% of homes bought are PURELY for investment!

Piers Alvey tenants chair, also standing for Chaucer ward by-election challenged unaffordable developments, reporting how rents are being forced up at Aylesbury by Notting Hill HT, some with ‘local rent’ but as market rents increases this will than now mean these also become unaffordable. Piers argued for No regeneration without ballot, rent caps, build and maintain council homes.

Tanya from SGTO and Southwark Benefit Justice challenged Hughes and Livingsone on their housing record and UKIP for targeting migrants for the lack of housing and cuts, whilst finance existed. Chris the chair, summed up the debate, stating how scared she was for her community and this was the most worrying election of her life. What real differences would any of the mainstream parties make was a real concern. Many may have been encouraged by the anti-austerity messages from Kingsley and others from the audience but they solemnly understood that those likely to lead this government would not see any benefits to the majority of the population but see proposals for the cuts and desperation to go deeper.

We are worried too, but this process of standing and asking you vote and work with us to challenge the cuts to build more networks and movements for the majority not the rich minority is to provide us with hope and a choice for the future. Stand with us.

This wasn’t said at the meeting but thought it might be of use – Where is the Money: The four biggest property developers profits went up by 557% since 2010 and they have enough land to immediately provide 1.4 million homes.