UK: Pandemic produces surge in household debt, accelerates child poverty

Barry Mason

The COVID-19 pandemic will plunge workers into greater levels of indebtedness, concludes a study from the debt advisor charity, Step Change.

Its report, “Coronavirus and personal debt: a financial recovery strategy for households” begins, “Compared to the Great Recession [2008] households with low-to-middle incomes entered the present crisis more likely to be facing problem debt and struggling to pay for essentials. In December 2019, 3.2 million people in the UK were in severe problem debt and 9.8 million were showing signs of financial distress.”

At the end of May, the charity commissioned a poll to determine the impact of the pandemic on personal finances. It estimates:

* 28 percent of adults, 14 million people, have experienced a direct negative effect on their income.

* 4.6 million people have accumulated £6.1 billion of arrears and debt, averaging £1,076 in arrears and £997 in debt per adult affected.

These figures reflect the situation in late May and are likely to increase substantially.

The survey found:

* 2.8 million people have fallen into arrears, with 1.2 million having arrears for utility bills, 820,000 for Council Tax and over half a million running up rent arrears.

* 4.2 million people have had to resort to borrowing to make ends meet. 1.7 million added to their credit card debt, 1.6 million used overdraft facilities and nearly a million availed themselves of high-cost credit products. Many have had to use savings, or asked family members to sell possessions.

A Resolution Foundation investigation showed 40 percent of high-income families have increased their saving during lockdown, while only 12 percent of those in low-income families have been able to do so.

Tens of thousands of jobs have already gone during the pandemic, and job losses are expected to mount as companies take advantage of the situation to impose long-term restructuring plans. Among these are car manufactures, airlines and other aviation companies operating within the UK.

In early June, the BBC interviewed James Reed, head of the UK’s largest job recruitment firm, Reeds, on its Today programme. He said unemployment could rise to 15 percent, meaning 5 million people would be out of work. He explained that “the number of jobs advertised is down two-thirds and had been consistently for two months now [which] suggests that there could be a lot more job losses to come.”

Asked if it would be like the 1980s recession, he replied, “I fear it could be a lot worse than that, it might be more like the 1930s.”

Child poverty is expected to surge, having already reached a new high. The UK’s Social Mobility Commission (SMC) found that 600,000 more children are now living in relative poverty than in 2012 and this number is set to escalate as a result of the pandemic.

The SMC is a non-departmental government body, whose remit includes advising ministries on the impact of government policies on social mobility. It warns the COVID-19 pandemic can only further slow social mobility that had already begun to falter.

The remit of its State of the Nation 2018 to 2019 report was to find out how the government had addressed slowing social mobility. It addressed 52 areas of concern and the government’s response. Using a traffic signal methodology, it noted nearly a third of questions of concern were given a red marking, indicating “little or no action.” Nearly half were given an amber marking, showing “some, but insufficient progress.”

In the report’s foreword, Chair Dame Martina Milburn referred to Conservative Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s empty election pledge of “leveling up” society with those at the bottom benefiting. “The Prime Minister has set as his goal ‘leveling up of opportunity’ across the country…there remains work to be done to understand what leveling up will mean in practice—especially as this will now take place in the context of the major economic and social dislocation caused by COVID-19…it is the poor and young who will suffer most from the economic downturn.”

Among its key findings, it noted, “600,000 more children are now living in relative poverty, compared to 2012. This is projected to increase markedly as a result of COVID-19.” It continued, “There is now mounting evidence that welfare changes over the past ten years have put more children into poverty. This is likely to have a big impact on social mobility. … Poverty rates are tied to inequalities in wealth and living standards, which have increased over the UK over the past two decades. The top 10 percent of people own almost half the total wealth.”

Of the Department of Work and Pension’s (DWP) introduction of the punitive Universal Credit benefits system, it claims, “The intention of Universal Credit was to lift more families out of poverty, but the DWP appears to have done little work to ensure it is not making child poverty worse.”

Of the government’s “early years” strategy, it notes, “Only 57 percent of pupils entitled to free school meals achieve a good level of development when starting school, compared with 74 percent of all other pupils.”

It continues, “By the age of five, children in disadvantaged areas already face limited life prospects. In some areas childcare is well resourced. In other areas, poor pay and career prospects drive a drain of early years workforce talent to other sectors of the economy. … Stabilising the early years workforce is the essential foundation to improving children’s life chances. …”

The warnings of the SMC are echoed by the Social Mobility Pledge organisation. Set up by former Tory education minister Justine Greening, it is a coalition of 450 businesses and 50 universities advocating for social mobility. It sends a friendly warning to the Johnson government of potential instability in the coming economic downturn.

Writing in the Guardian, June 10, Greening said, “coronavirus and its economic impact is now making [the] opportunity gap significantly wider” in “communities across the country where people are being left behind…places such as Corby, Wellingborough and Norwich are all facing an economic double hit from existing poor social mobility made worse by the impact of the economic crisis of coronavirus.”

The London School of Economics published a report on May 28 by the LSE’s Centre for Economic Performance. What it termed the “COVID generation” were “young Britons mostly under the age of 25, who face declining mobility unless bold moves are made to create a fairer society. …” It noted, “before the crisis, younger generations were already facing declining ‘absolute mobility’: falling real wages, fewer opportunities and stagnant or declining living standards. Now that the crisis has drastically worsened economic and education inequality, young people are even less likely to fare better than past generations…less likely to fulfil their potential. … There is a genuine concern that these inequalities could become entrenched for some time.”

One of the authors of the report, Professor Lee Eliot Major, explained, “There are serious concerns that the pandemic will plunge the COVID-19 generation into a dark age of declining social mobility because of rising economic and educational inequalities…while the coronavirus health shock has particularly affected the over-60s, the longer-term economic and social damage is likely to hit young people disproportionately, especially the under 25s.”

UK: COVID-19 killing the working class at more than twice the rate of the wealthiest

Simon Whelan

Commenting on data produced by the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the Financial Times noted at the beginning of May, “The virus may have infected both Prince Charles and prime minister Boris Johnson, demonstrating that no one was immune, but the ONS study found that those infected in the most deprived communities in inner cities were much more likely to die.”

The coronavirus death rate in the most deprived areas of England continues to run at more than double that in the least deprived areas, the latest data from ONS shows.

Its new report, “Deaths involving Covid-19 by local area and socioeconomic deprivation: deaths occurring between 1 March and 31 May 2020,” reveals that deaths in working class districts in England and Wales are twice that in the wealthiest areas.

The ONS gives a figure of 46,687 deaths involving coronavirus in England and Wales between March 1 and May 31, 2020, representing a quarter of all deaths in this period. Overall, this means there were 81.2 deaths involving COVID-19 per 100,000 people in England and Wales.

During the period surveyed, the rate of deaths involving the coronavirus for the least deprived areas (Decile 10) was 58.8 per 100,000 population. The rate in the most deprived areas (Decile 1) was 128.3 deaths per 100,000 population. This is 118 percent higher than the least deprived areas.

In the least deprived areas of the country, the age-standardised mortality rate for all deaths was 242.6 deaths per 100,000 population. In the most deprived area, the age-standardised mortality rate for all deaths was 466.2 deaths per 100,000 population—a staggering 92.2 percent higher than in the least deprived areas.

The Index of Multiple Deprivation utilised by the ONS is an overall measure of deprivation based on factors such as income, employment, health, education, crime, the living environment, and access to housing within an area. “General mortality rates are normally higher in more deprived areas, but so far Covid-19 appears to be taking them higher still,” says Nick Stripe, the head of health analysis at the ONS.

The pandemic is exacerbating the effects of already growing socioeconomic and urban inequalities. Working class districts most heavily hit by the pandemic tend to be located within the inner cities. These districts have suffered decades of neglect and austerity, endless cuts to public services and public housing, administered mainly by Labour Party-run local councils.

There is a clear link between COVID-19 mortality and how densely populated an urban area is. Between March and May, the most built-up areas, officially designated as “urban major conurbations,” like Greater Manchester and the West Midlands, experienced 124 COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people. Across smaller “urban cities or towns,” like Preston and Brighton, there were 74 COVID-19 deaths per 100,000 people.

This rate shrinks to 48 in rural villages and 23 per 100,000 in the most sparsely populated areas of England and Wales. In general, the more people who come into contact with each other in a given area, the more the virus exacerbates the multifaceted nature of socioeconomic and urban deprivation.

The national medical director of NHS England said many of the factors that can heighten the risk of COVID-19, like diabetes, obesity, and lung disease, are found “more frequently in more deprived areas.” Professor Stephen Powis commented, “It is absolutely crucial that we narrow the gap in health inequalities.”

The ONS analysis reveals the disproportionate impact of the death toll in working class districts, especially the poorest. Inner-city London boroughs with high levels of socioeconomic deprivation were hit hard by the virus. The capital city experienced the worst burden of COVID-19 deaths, where the virulent and deadly virus was involved in more than 4 in 10 deaths since the beginning of March.

By way of contrast, in the south-west of England where the country is less urban and wealthier, but also older on average, just over 1 in 10 deaths involved the coronavirus.

Nine out of the 10 local authorities with the highest COVID-19 age-standardised mortality rates were to be found within predominantly working class areas of London. Brent had the highest overall age-standardised rate, with 210.9 deaths per 100,000 population, followed by Newham (196.8 deaths) and Hackney (182.9).

The only local authority outside London in the top 10 was Middlesbrough. The city of Salford and the district of Hertsmere were also in the top 20 worst-affected areas for COVID-19.

The head of mortality analysis at the ONS, Sarah Caul, told the Guardian, “Although London had some of the highest Covid-19 mortality rates in the country during March and April, it is now experiencing lower mortality rates compared with most areas. During May, the region with the highest age-adjusted Covid-19 mortality rate was the north-east, where the rate was double that of London. The south-west region continued to have the lowest mortality rate overall and during each of the last three months.”

“Meanwhile” explained Caul, supporting the point made by Nick Stripe, the head of health analysis at the ONS, “people living in more deprived areas have continued to experience Covid-19 mortality rates more than double those living in less deprived areas. General mortality rates are normally higher in more deprived areas, but Covid-19 appears to be increasing this effect.”

The area with the highest number of deaths was the inner-city district of Crabtree and Fir Vale in the city of Sheffield. A total of 66 people died with COVID-19 between March and May in this district, according to latest data from the ONS. The second highest number of fatalities, including deaths in hospitals, care homes and elsewhere in the community, was 36 in Church End in Brent, London.

Crabtree and Fir Vale suffered almost twice as many deaths than that of the next highest area.

In Sheffield, where the socioeconomic and urban inequalities are especially sharp, the total of COVID-19 deaths recorded during the same time frame in the wealthier south-west outer suburbs—neighbourhoods like Ecclesall and Greystones—was zero.

The Crabtree and Fir Vale area is where several care homes are located. The government’s criminal negligence and homicidal herd immunity policy have led to 14,022 registered deaths of people in care homes from COVID-19 just in England and Wales, up to June 13.

Many workers in Sheffield must survive in a shark-infested pool of private landlords charging high rents for slum terrace housing property. Overcrowding is rife in the inner cities because such conditions have led to multiple-occupancy family households in the poorest districts. Amid such overcrowding the pandemic has multiplied. Crabtree and Fir Vale is such an area, with multiple occupancy, public housing and poor quality, privately rented and tiny terraced houses, many overcrowded.

Professor Nishi Chaturvedi, director of the MRC unit for lifelong health and ageing at University College London, commented that deprivation increases the impact of COVID-19 through a range of factors—including overcrowding, income, employment, disability, and health status. Chaturverdi pointed out how a similar increase in risk had been seen previously in flu outbreaks, and to a lesser degree with chronic diseases.

She told the Guardian, “Deprivation is associated both with exposure to greater viral load, and with enhanced susceptibility to disease as a consequence of poor health.”

Sharp rise in new coronavirus cases in US south and west

Bryan Dyne

Six weeks after the Trump administration declared that it had successfully “flattened the curve” and told states to begin reopening, there is now an accelerating rise in coronavirus cases in the American south and west. Contrary to the official line, the pandemic remains a continued and extraordinarily dangerous public health crisis.

There are now more than 2.2 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the United States, along with nearly 120,000 known deaths. The US accounts for about a quarter of the world’s cases and deaths, which currently stand at 8.3 million and 450,000, respectively. The worst-hit countries in terms of new cases and new deaths remain the United States, Brazil, India and Russia. Others include Chile, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Peru, Bangladesh and Mexico.

Half of the new cases in the US have occurred since May 1, when the federal guidelines to “slow the spread” of the deadly contagion expired. At the time, the disease had not truly been contained, only blunted, by the physical distancing measures abided to by workers across the country. A rational and scientific plan would have continued such efforts, while expanding testing and contact tracing to hunt down new cases of the disease.

Every effort was instead made to reopen the economies of every state, regardless of whether or not there were necessary medical facilities, equipment and personnel to prevent, find and treat cases of the coronavirus. The Coronavirus Task Force, which provided the veneer of a federal response, has been effectively disbanded. Beginning with Georgia on April 24, every state has now partially or largely reopened its offices, warehouses, factories and other workplaces.

Arizona, California, Florida and Texas are among the worst affected states this week. Arizona two days ago recorded 2,392 cases and 25 deaths, while it saw 1,827 new cases and 20 deaths yesterday. California suffered a cumulative 7,266 cases and 163 deaths over those days. There were 2,783 cases and 55 deaths in Florida on Tuesday, and 2,610 cases and 25 deaths in the state on Wednesday. And in Texas, which has seen some of the largest outbreaks since the reopening began, noted 7,658 new cases and 88 new deaths in the past 48 hours.

The number of new cases has also hit all-time highs in ten states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina and Texas. While New York was the epicenter for the pandemic in the country—and the world—in late March and April, there is now community spread of COVID-19 in every state.

At the same time, governors of multiple states are attempting to shift the blame for their own lack of preparedness for the pandemic, despite repeated warnings from the World Health Organization since January, onto their populations. Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently admonished 20- to 29-year-olds, claiming, “They are not wearing face masks, they’re not sanitizing their hands, they’re not maintaining social distancing.”

It was Abbott who made such conditions possible in the first place. While claiming that the state had expanded testing and stocked up on protective equipment, he overrode local lockdown orders in the biggest Texas cities, and reopened all retail stores, restaurants, movie theaters and malls on May 1. Bars, museums, bowling alleys, bingo halls, skating rinks, aquariums, salons, barbershops and even rodeos have also since been allowed to reopen. The state also has plans to reopen its amusement parks and carnivals.

Texas has also seen an increase in the number of new hospitalizations, to more than 2,200 over a seven-day rolling average. The state only has an estimated 38 percent of its ICU beds available, even as the number of new cases over the past fourteen days has increased by more than 60 percent.

In Florida, at least six bars have closed only a week after reopening in response to the new coronavirus cases surging in the state. Contact tracers in the state have found that those bars have acted as strong vectors for transmission of the virus, causing large percentages of their patrons and employees to become ill. The state as a whole has had nearly 83,000 confirmed cases and more than 3,000 deaths.

There have also been clusters in far less densely populated states. Uinta County, Wyoming now has 80 confirmed infections, many of which are “connected to a particular gathering at a public location,” according to state health officer Dr. Alexia Harrist. She went on to note that, “This situation illustrates how it doesn’t take much to really change the disease picture within a community.”

Harrist’s comments are among the most explicit warnings from a health official in the country. In the absence of a vaccine, even a single case of COVID-19 can reignite the pandemic in a county, state or even a country if allowed to spread unchecked.

There is, however, cautiously optimistic news for the treatment of patients critically ill with COVID-19. British investigators of the Recovery Trial (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) issued a press release on Tuesday on the use of Dexamethasone, a well-known corticosteroid medication often used for various inflammatory conditions. Last week doctors halted this arm of the trial after there were a sufficient number of patients to assess their data. They found that the use of Dexamethasone led to a reduction of death by one-third in ventilated patients and by one-fifth in those receiving oxygen.

The data was statistically significant, meaning that their findings were most likely not due to chance. This translates to one death prevented by treatment of around eight ventilated patients and approximately 25 patients requiring oxygen alone. The drug had no benefit in preventing the disease or for treating mild cases, and no one should use it without medical advice.

According to Dr. Peter Horby, lead investigator and professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases in the Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, said, “Dexamethasone is the first drug to be shown to improve survival in COVID-19. This is an extremely welcome result. The survival benefit is clear and large in those patients who are sick enough to require oxygen treatment, so Dexamethasone should now become the standard of care in these patients. Dexamethasone is inexpensive, on the shelf, and can be used immediately to save lives worldwide.”

The World Health Organization also reviewed their data on hydroxychloroquine and affirmed that they support the conclusions reached by the Recovery Trial’s hydroxychloroquine arm. On June 4, the principal investigators of the Recovery Trial reported that they found no benefit for hydroxychloroquine in reducing hospitalization time on ventilation or mortality. The WHO will suspend this drug from this therapeutic from their Solidarity 1 Trial. They will still need to issue guidance. They did add that the use of hydroxychloroquine in a prophylaxis setting has yet to be determined though a recent trail for post exposure prophylaxis published on June 3 in the New England Journal of Medicine found no benefit.

On Monday, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced they had withdrawn the emergency approval of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for treatment of COVID-19. They wrote, “based on FDA’s continued review of the scientific evidence available for HCQ and CQ to treat COVID-19, the FDA has determined that the statutory criteria for EUA … are no longer met. Specifically, FDA has determined that CQ and HCQ are unlikely to be effective in treating COVID 19.” It seems that the long but tortuous story of a miracle cure once touted by the quack-in-chief has finally reached its end.

The India-China border clash and the inflammable state of world geopolitics

Keith Jones

A clash Monday night that left dozens of Indian Army and Chinese People’s Liberation Army personnel dead has raised the prospect of an all-out war between the world’s two most populous countries and rival nuclear-armed powers.

Since the clash, both Beijing and New Delhi have committed to disengaging the military forces now deployed in close quarters along their disputed border, and to a peaceful diplomatic solution to their rival territorial claims. But each is adamant that the other provoked the clash—the first fatal encounter between Indian and Chinese troops in 45 years—and must stand down.

Following a telephone conversation Wednesday between Indian foreign minister S. Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, New Delhi issued a statement that accused Beijing of responsibility for “the violence and casualties,” and said “the need of hour” is for “the Chinese side to reassess its actions and take corrective steps.”

Beijing countered with a statement that said Wang had demanded India “severely punish those responsible” for the Indian military’s “violent” and “adventurous” conduct,” “strictly control” its “frontline troops and immediately cease all provocative actions.” The statement added that India “must not underestimate China’s firm will to safeguard its territorial sovereignty.”

Following a meeting yesterday between India’s Defence Minister and the military high command, India raised the alert level of the tens of thousands of Army and Air Force personnel it has deployed along its disputed border with China to the highest level. The Indian Navy, meanwhile, has been instructed to prepare for possible encounters with Chinese warships and submarines.

Also Wednesday, Narendra Modi, India’s ultra-right Hindu supremacist prime minister, gave a televised address in which he vowed that “the sacrifice of our soldiers will not be in vain …India wants peace, but if provoked India is capable of giving a befitting reply.”

India and China’s disputed 3,500-kilometer (2,175 mile) border cuts through inhospitable Himalayan terrain. Monday night’s fighting took place along a narrow ridge more than 4,260 meters (14,000 feet) above sea level.

However, under conditions of a systemic breakdown of world capitalism and a consequent surge in inter-imperialist and great-power conflict, the Sino-Indian border dispute has become enmeshed with the US-Chinese strategic rivalry, enormously adding to its explosive character, and investing it with huge global geo-political significance.

India’s venal capitalist ruling elite has integrated India into the US military-strategic offensive against China over the past decade-and-a-half. Under Modi, New Delhi has thrown open its military bases to US warships and warplanes and developed an ever-expanding web of bilateral, trilateral and quadrilateral military-security ties with Washington and its principal Asia-Pacific allies, Japan and Australia.

Beijing has responded by seeking to leverage its close security partnership with India’s historic arch rival Pakistan, including through the building of pipeline, rail, and road links from western China to Pakistan’s Arabian Sea port of Gwadar, with the aim of counteracting US plans to economically strangle China by seizing Indian Ocean and South China Sea chokepoints. The China Pakistan Economic Corridor passes through China’s Aksai Chin region, near to where Monday’s fighting occurred and on territory that Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government pointedly and provocatively reasserted India’s historic claim to last August.

To date, the Trump administration’s response to Monday’s border clash has been limited to anodyne statements expressing support for a peaceful resolution of the conflict. But over the previous month, Washington publicly egged New Delhi on with denunciations of Chinese “aggression” against India.

Moreover, it did so as part of a massive escalation of US imperialism’s all-sided economic, diplomatic, and military-strategic offensive against China, whose logic ends in war. This includes:

* Blaming Beijing for the massive loss of life in the US from COVID-19 due to its own negligence and incompetence in a transparent attempt to deflect public anger, but also with a view to justifying aggression against Beijing;

* Dispatching three aircraft carrier strike groups last week to the western Pacific where they will operate in waters just off of mainland China;

* Launching a drive to “decouple” the US economy from China, by pressuring American companies to move operations from China. With a view to further harnessing India to US strategic objectives, Trump and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo have very publicly promoted India as an alternate global manufacturing production-chain hub to China;

* Intensifying its campaign to pressure countries to bar Huawei, China’s flagship high tech company, from their 5G networks, and to otherwise thwart China’s emergence as a competitor in high-tech industries.

* Providing advanced-weaponry to Taiwan and implicitly threatening to repudiate its support for the “one China policy.”

* And in a move directed against both China and Russia, pressing forward with a massive nuclear weapons build-up.

Alongside this, amid the pandemic, the Trump administration has intensified sanctions and military pressure on Iran and Venezuela, and greenlighted Israel’s plans to outright annex the West Bank.

The Indo-China border dispute is only one of numerous global flashpoints where US aggression has incited or aggravated inter-state conflicts and transformed them into potential catalysts of a global conflagration.

Angered by the US refusal to enter into meaningful negotiations or relax in any way its punishing economic sanctions, North Korea on Monday blew up its joint liaison office with South Korea.

The imperialist rivals of the US, for their part, have likewise responded to the pandemic and the greatest economic seizure of world capitalism since the Depression of the 1930s by intensifying their own preparations for war. In the case of Germany and France, this means accelerating the drive to develop a European military that can assert their claims to markets, natural resources and strategic territories independent of and when needed against the United States.

Writing in Die Welt last week, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borell and EU Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton declared the ”mounting tensions between the United States and China” demonstrate the need for European “hard power,” so it can “bring its influence to bear, impose its worldview, and uphold its own interests.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has served as an accelerant for all the malignancies that have spread throughout global capitalism over the past four decades and especially since 2008—the rapacious growth of social inequality, militarism and war, the putrefaction of democratic forms of rule, and the capitalist elite’s promotion of reaction and rehabilitation of the far right.

It is also acting as the accelerant of global class struggle. In the initial stages of the pandemic, and under conditions where after weeks of doing nothing to stop the spread of COVID-19 and when governments then imposed hastily improvised lockdowns, there was a seeming diminishing of social protest. However, the mass multi-racial and multi-ethnic demonstrations that erupted in the US in response to the police murder of George Floyd and subsequently spread around the world underscore that the wave of strikes and mass anti-government protests that gathered pace in 2018 and 2019 were but the initial stages of a mass and incipiently revolutionary counteroffensive of the global working class.

The response of the capitalist elite to the pandemic, particularly in the imperialist countries of North America and Europe—its criminal negligence, massive theft of public assets, and now its campaign to force workers to return to work even as COVID-19 continues to spread—have produced a social catastrophe. They have also laid bare the brutality, political-ideological bankruptcy and immorality of a moribund capitalist order.

Under these conditions there is a real and growing danger that the capitalist ruling elites, beset by intractable economic and political problems and facing mounting social opposition, will see in military conflict a way out—a means of suppressing the class struggle and promoting “national unity,” through a combination of frenzied chauvinist patriotism and state repression, legitimized as a “necessity of war.”

India is a case in point. The Indian elite’s calamitous response to the pandemic—an ill-prepared lockdown; a refusal to take rudimentary health measures, such as mass testing; and now a “reopening of the economy”—has resulted in 120 million jobless and a COVID-19 infections growth-rate that is among the highest in the world. Yesterday, while India’s media was eulogizing the 20 dead Indian soldiers, the official tally of COVID-19 deaths rose by 2,003 or more than 20 percent.

Taking advantage of a discredited and complicit opposition, Modi and his BJP have time and again used rabid communalism, bellicose nationalism, and reckless “surgical strikes” on Pakistan to deflect social opposition, stoke reaction, and divide the working class.

But nowhere is the threat of a crisis-ridden government and ruling class being “tempted” by war more palpable than in America. US imperialism is today led by a fascist-minded oligarch and would-be tin-pot dictator, its political elite is at war with itself, its massive military remains its one residual strength over its rivals, and last and most importantly it faces increasingly militant opposition from the working class.

The intensification of the global capitalist crisis and the class struggle lend still greater urgency to the struggle against war. The only social force that can stop war is the international working class. But this requires that the increasingly global character of its struggles become a conscious strategy, and its mobilization as an independent political force in the struggle for workers’ power and socialism. We urge all WSWS readers to join us in the fight to arm the working class with this understanding.

UK Medical Research Council/DFID African Research Leader Scheme 2020

Application Deadline: 8th September 2020 16:00 GMT+1

About the Award: This MRC/ DFID jointly funded scheme aims to strengthen research leadership across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) by attracting and retaining exceptionally talented individuals who will lead high quality programmes of research on key global health issues pertinent to SSA. The African Research Leader (ARL; PI) should be supported by an enthusiastic local research environment and by a strong linkage with a UK partner (i.e. the UK Co-Investigator; Co-I).

Type: Grants, Research

Selection Criteria: Strong applications will meet the four key elements of the scheme, namely:

• a talented ‘rising star’ African Research Leader candidate,
• a high-quality research programme proposal,
• a research-conducive academic African environment / institution,
• a firm partnership with a UK partner institution

Eligible Countries: African countries

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value & Duration of Award: Funding for the scheme is provided by the UK MRC and the UK Department for International Development (DFID). Awards will provide support for up to 5 years and the MRC Contribution should not exceed £750k in total.

How to Apply: Your application will consist of the online Je-S proposal form and the following attachments to it:

• Proposal cover letter (optional, maximum of 2 pages)
• Separate CVs (maximum of 2 pages) required for PI, Co-Is and each named researcher
• List of Publications (maximum of 1 page) required for PI, Co-Is and each named researcher
• Case for Support (maximum 19 pages; refer to guidance)
• Justification of Resources (maximum of 2 pages)
• Data Management Plan (maximum of 3 pages)
• Supporting letters (PDF copy of signed letters, please use Je-S attachment type ‘Letter of Support’) from:
• The Vice Chancellor or equivalent at the African research institution (mandatory, maximum of 2 pages), to include:

a) declaration that it is a Government-owned/not-for profit institution;
b) statement about the research supportive environment available at the institution;
c) commitment to the continuity of support for the ARL;  
d) formal confirmation that the institution agrees to the roles and responsibilities as detailed in the application
When uploading the document as ‘Letter of Support’, please describe the document as ARL Host Institute Declaration’.

• The placement organisation confirming their willingness to host the Research Leader’s proposed training visit plus details of the proposed placement using the placement template (if appropriate, maximum of 2 pages) – as one PDF.

If uploading this ‘Optional’ document as ‘Letter of Support’, please describe the document as ‘Placement Confirmation’

• Key stakeholders e.g. Ministry of Health (if appropriate, maximum of 2 pages).

If uploading this ‘Optional’ document as ‘Letter of Support’, please describe the document as ‘Key Stakeholder’ – (Detail name of Stakeholder)

Please read the MRC Guidance for Applicants, which will provide you with the page limit for the attachments and guide you through the standard processes for preparing a proposal, costing your proposals and any ethical and regulatory requirements that may apply to the research. Please refer to the scheme specific guidance in preparing your case for support.

• It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Friedrich Naumann Foundation Scholarship 2020 for International Students

Application Deadlines:

• 30th April 2020
• 31st October 2020

Type: Bachelors, Masters

Eligibility: young people committed to the political ideas of the German liberal party and willing to take responsibility. They come from any discipline or subject taught at state-recognised universities of applied sciences or higher-education institutions in Germany. Those who are awarded a scholarship by the Foundation for Freedom are considered to be members of the ‘liberal family’ in Germany.
The sponsorship for students from abroad is intended for international applicants who wish to pursue a full-time programme at a state or state-recognised higher-education institution in Germany. Qualified students from abroad are invited to apply for a scholarship funding a Master’s or a state examination degree (in the main study period).

Selection Criteria:

• giftedness: Candidates have very good to outstanding academic or scientific records in their subject areas and well-rounded interests within school or university and beyond.
• personal requirements: Candidates are reliable, highly motivated personalities, who are willing to make decisions and take responsibility in the tradition of the German liberal party and ready to actively contribute to the further development of the social, political, cultural and economic life.
• social and political engagement: Candidates have a distinct liberal profile combined with an awareness of and commitment to social and political issues, which translates into participation in higher-education institutions, engagement in a liberal political party or organisations, associations and initiatives.

Eligible Countries: International

To be Taken at (Country): Germany

Number of Awards: Not specified

Value of Award: The scholarship’s worth is up to EUR 850 per month. In addition, there is a contribution to health insurance. The FNS offers furthermore non-material support in the form of a variety of projects, events and initiatives.

Duration of Award: Minimum funding covers two semesters starting with the beginning of the sponsorship. It is initially granted for one year. If applied for, sponsorship may be extended until completion of the degree.

How to Apply: Please find the application forms and further information on the application procedure here

• It is important to go through all application requirements in the Award Webpage (see Link below) before applying.

Visit Award Webpage for Details

Move Charity Dollars to the Front Lines

Chuck Collins

Congress should pass a three-year “Emergency Charity Stimulus” to move $200 billion to frontline working nonprofit groups by increasing payout requirements for private foundations and donor-advised funds.

These billions have already been paid for by tax breaks taken by wealthy donors.  This is $200 billion that won’t add a penny to what taxpayers will pay.

America’s millionaires and billionaires have taken substantial tax breaks to create over 86,000 private foundations. Wealthy and affluent families have received even greater tax breaks in setting up 728,000 donor-advised funds (DAFs).  As wealth has concentrated in the hands of a few, so have charitable dollars, according to IPS research on “top heavy philanthropy.”

Enormous resources are now stashed away in these privately-controlled charity organizations, according to our policy brief, The Case for an Emergency Charity Stimulus. Over $1 trillion is parked in private foundations and another $120 billion in donor-advised funds. And as communities struggle, the lion’s share of these dollars are sitting idle.

Private foundations are required to pay out a mere 5 percent of their assets each year, with most foundations treating this as a ceiling and not a floor.  That 5 percent payout can include unlimited overhead and contributions to donor-advised funds. Meanwhile, donor-advised funds (DAFs) have no mandated payout at all.  DAFs are now the largest recipient of charitable funds and are used by wealthy donors pledging non-cash assets, according to our IPS report, Warehousing Wealth: Donor Advised Charity Funds Sequestering Billions in the Face of Extreme Inequality.

During the COVID-19 crisis, many foundations and donor-advised funds have voluntarily increased their payout.  But we need to ensure that charitable giving doesn’t fall off a cliff in 2021 and 2022.  Congress should mandate an increased payout to move charitable funds off the sidelines and to the front lines.  It must ensure that payout funds flow to directly to working charities, not remain warehoused.

The emergency charity stimulus proposal would double the payout for private foundations from 5 percent to 10 percent for three years.  Similarly, DAFs would be required to have a 10 percent payout.  And  donations to donor-advised funds, excessive overhead, and investments in for-profit ventures  would not qualify toward the payout.

According to a new Ipsos poll, 72 percent of Americans support an emergency charity stimulus.  See a full summary of poll results HERE. According to this poll, most Americans have a limited understanding of how charitable foundations and donor-advised funds work.  Once explained, however, the poll found many characteristics of foundations and DAFs are not very acceptable to Americans.  For example, 93 percent of Americans found it unacceptable that donor-advised funds (DAFs) are under no obligation to disburse any funds to active charities.

Over 450 foundation leaders, including trustees of private foundations and individuals with donor-advised funds have signed a letter to Congress urging passage of an emergency charity stimulus, sponsored by the Patriotic Millionaires, the Wallace Global Fund, and the Institute for Policy Studies Program on Inequality and its Charity Reform Initiative.

New budget imposes tax on speech in Bangladesh

Saifur Rahman Saif

In a text message, mobile phone operator Robi asked me, other users as well, to stay with it saying that the government has imposed 15 per cent taxes on talks.

National Democratic Front’ president Dr MA Karim and general secretary Brigadier General (retired)  M Jahangir Hussain in a joint statement rejecting the national budget  for the fiscal year 2020-2021, saying that the government, which used to come up with the slogan of digitalization, has raised the expenditures of mobile phone calls, internet and online shopping.

‘The budget shows no hope for labourers, farmers and general people,’ the statement that sends to other media and me too, reads.

The budget did not put guidelines to fight the pandemic for the sake of people’s lives and livelihoods, the statement added.

The statement is also critical on  raising the area of taxes and value added taxes –which  help hike of prices of essentials  harming the farmers, garment workers, expatriates- who  keep functioning the wheels of the economy.

The Workers Party of Bangladesh (Marxist), in its reaction to the budget, terming it as far from the reality, said it preserves the interest of the looters.

In a statement, the party’ president Nurul Hasan and general secretary Iqbal Kabir Jahid said the agricultural sector is ignored in the budget. `Medical sector is also ignored in it,’ it stated.

‘The tax was imposed on calls of mobile phones and the use of the internet is an act of anti-people,’ the statement further said.

The statement ended with the words,’ we reject it’.

In Bangladesh, the democratic government likes to hear its praising only, not criticism, even if it is constructive. A number of critics had to go to the dungeon very recently for their words.

So, I would like to censor myself in this writing. Here I’m not putting any comment of mine. I just quoted some statements for the readers. But I think the esteemed readers are intelligent enough to sum up the in-depthness of this piece.

Impact of COVID-19 on the International Economy

Shruti Chaudhary

The World Health Organization (WHO) first announced COVID-19 as a world health crisis in January 2020. Since the virus was first diagnosed in Wuhan, China, it has been actively discovered in over 190 countries. In early March, the point of convergence of infections transferred from China to Europe, especially Italy and Spain, but by April 2020, the virus was all over in the United States as well, where the number of cases kept accelerating. The disease has relapsed more than 3.2 million people around the globe, about one-third in the US, with thousands of casualties. More than 80 countries have sealed their borders to arrivals from international states with infections, ordered businesses and companies to close, instructed their populations to self-isolate, closed schools to an estimated 1.5 billion children and many have even declared nation-wide lockdowns.

The breakout of this fatal pandemic all over the globe has unsettled the social, economic, political, financial and religious systems structures of the whole world. The World’s leading economies such as the UK, US, China, Germany, France, Italy, Japan and many others are at the brink of disintegration. Besides, Stock Markets around the world have been thumped and oil prices have fallen off a cliff. In just a week 3.3 million Americans reported for unemployment and a week later another 6.6 million people started looking for jobs. According to an April 8, 2020 forecast by the World Trade Organization (WTO), global trade volumes are predicted to decline between 13% and 32% in 2020 as a result of the economic impact of COVID-19. The WTO also explains that the effect on global trade volumes could even exceed the drop in global trade during the peak of the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

Also, many economists and experts on financial affairs have alerted about the aggravating state of global economic and financial framework. For instance, Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of International Monitory Fund (IMF), elucidated that “a recession at least as bad as during the Global Financial Crisis or worse”. Furthermore, Covid-19 is degrading the global economy because the world has been encountering the most gruelling economic circumstance since World War-II. Taking into consideration the human cost of the Coronavirus pandemic it is unfathomable, therefore all countries should come together and work with collaboration and association to safeguard the humans as well as curb the economic injuries. For example, the nationwide lockdowns have restricted several businesses so as to contain the virus from travelling. Consequently these business are coming to an abrupt halt globally and thus, damaging the global economy.

The pandemic emergency is daring governments to execute monetary and fiscal policies that help credit and stock markets and assist economic activity. In doing so, however, these policy strategies are exhibiting differences between nation states that encourage nationalism against those that ask for a harmonized international reaction. They also are strengthening policy differences between developed and developing economies and in Europe between northern and southern members of the Eurozone.

Contemplating the flabbergasting situation G-20 countries called for an emergency conference meeting to talk about deteriorating conditions and formulate a plan to fight against Covid-19 to reduce the losses. The expansion of the pandemic is speeding up and resulting in more and more economic fatalities every day. It is mentioned by the U.S. official from federal reserves that American unemployment might rise to 30% and its economy might shrink by half. As for as the jobs of common middle class people are concerned, there is also an actual threat of losing their jobs because with business closing down it shows that companies and industries will not be able to pay remuneration to workers due to which they will have to lay off them. Also regarding the stock market, it has been severely vandalized by Covid-19 for the stock market of the US has moved to a lower position being down by about thirty percent. By looking over the subsisting state of various businesses, many of the investors are removing their money from numerous businesses. In this regard $83 billion have already been withdrawn from emerging markets since the fallout of this deadly virus. So, the effect of Covid-19 is acute and critical on the economic system of the world because people are not expending much money. Resultantly businesses are not getting sufficient revenue and thus, most of the businesses are closing down.

It has also been observed that the economic revival from this deadly disease is only possible by 2021 because it has given severe blows to the international economy and the countries are facing several difficulties to bring their respective economies back to a steady state. But even the estimates of the expected recovery in 2021 are correspondingly debatable, with consequences depending greatly on the time span for which the epidemic lasts and the efficacy of the policy reactions.

“This crisis is first and foremost a health crisis which has forced governments to take unprecedented measures to protect people’s lives,” WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo explained. “The unavoidable declines in trade and output will have painful consequences for households and businesses, on top of the human suffering caused by the disease itself.”

Most of the countries are experiencing stagnation and subsidence of their economic composition that highlights the deteriorating conditions they have been going through. In this regard approximately 80 countries have already applied to International Monetary Fund (IMF) for seeking financial help (E.g.: Prime Minister of Pakistan Imran Khan also requested IMF to help Islamabad to fight against Novel Coronavirus). Moreover, there is unpredictability and unreliability concerning the growth of Coronavirus. So, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) stated that global growth could be cut in half to 1.5% in 2020, if the virus continues to spread. By now, most of the economics experts have already predicted about the recession to occur because there is no certainty and as of yet no one knows about how far this pandemic will fall and how long-lasting and crippling its effects would be. Besides, Bernard M. Wolf, professor, Economics Schulich School of Business, commented that “it is catastrophic and we have never seen anything like this, we have a huge portion of the economy and people under lockdown that’s going to have a huge impact on what can be produced and not produced”.

As Covid-19 has already been realised to be the dangerous cause behind shutting down of several businesses and closure of supermarkets and malls many experts and economists are panicked and have predicted that this life-threatening pandemic could give rise to inflation. For example, Bloomberg Economics warns that “full-year GDP growth could fall to zero in a worst-case pandemic scenario”. There are many sectors and economies that appear to be most endangered because of this infectious virus, such as, both the demand and supply have been negatively affected by the infection, as a consequence of depressed activity. Foreign Direct Investment flows could drop between 5 to 15 percent. In addition, the most attacked sectors have come to peril such as tourism and travel-related companies, hotels, restaurants, sports events, consumer and electronics industries, financial markets, transportation, and overburden of health setups. Diane Swonk, Chief Economist at the Advisory Firm Grant Thornton, explained that “various nations have multinational companies that operate in the world because the economy is global. For instance, China has touchpoints into every other economy in the world, they are part of the global supply chain. So one should shut down production in the U.S. by shutting down production in China”.

Also, Kristalina Georgieva in a press release gave a four-point plan i.e. she suggested that four things need to be done to fight against Covid-19 and avoid or minimize losses. Firstly, keep up with necessary containment courses of action and assistance for the health system. Secondly, protect affected people and firms with large timely targeted fiscal and financial sector expedients. Thirdly, lower down the stress from the financial system and avoid con tangent. Fourthly, must plan for recovery and revival and work towards minimizing the potential scaring effects of the crisis through policy action.

Considering the deadly and intensifying conditions around the world, countries require cooperation, coordination and collaboration among themselves including the help and mature as well as practical behaviour of people to productively combat against the infectious disease. Otherwise, because of the globalized and connected world, wrong actions, plans and strategies taken by any nation state will produce a severe impact on other countries as well. This is not the time and situation of political point-scoring and fight with each other rather it is high time for all the countries to cooperate, coordinate, and collaborate and help each other to overcome this lethal pandemic first to save the global economic and financial structure.

Australian PM outlines bipartisan austerity offensive

Oscar Grenfell

In a nationally-televised address yesterday, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison outlined plans for sweeping cuts to social spending, further government handouts to big business and a stepped-up offensive against jobs, wages and conditions. All of these attacks on the working class are to be enforced in partnership with the Labor Party and the trade unions.

Morrison’s speech, to the pro-business Committee for Economic Development of Australia forum, was part of a broader discussion in ruling circles on the need for a “snap-back.” This is aimed at forcing ordinary people to pay for the economic crisis triggered by the coronavirus pandemic.

Morrison made clear that his Liberal-National government plans to continue withdrawing the meagre relief measures introduced as more than a million workers were laid off or stood down in the first six weeks of the pandemic.

At the same time, the corporate elite is seeking to exploit the crisis to implement a pro-business overhaul of industrial relations and workplace conditions, involving the further destruction of full-time jobs, ever greater levels of casual and precarious work, and the stripping of the limited workers’ entitlements that remain.

Morrison touted the “reopening of the economy” being presided over by federal and state governments, Labor and Liberal-National alike, as the first step in a return to “growth,” a code word for the resumption of corporate profit making.

In practice, all the safety restrictions aimed at containing COVID-19 are being overturned and workers are being herded back into workplaces, even as the coronavirus continues to circulate. The dangers have been indicated by a new spike in confirmed infections in Victoria, the country’s second most populous state. There have been 18 new cases over the past 24 hours, following more than 20 during the previous two days.

Morrison noted that broad sections of the economy had never closed, even at the height of the pandemic. Construction and manufacturing workers were forced to remain in their places of employment by the corporations and unions, despite the impossibility of social distancing in often crowded workplaces.

The PM reiterated that the JobKeeper subsidy would be withdrawn in September. Under the program, unveiled in May, the government has paid the wages bill of some businesses to the tune of $1,500 a fortnight per employee. The government already has stripped the payments from childcare workers.

While the workings of JobKeeper remain shrouded in secrecy, it appears that the payment primarily has been provided to large corporations, such as Boeing. Morrison admitted that only around 1.6 million workers are currently covered by the scheme, despite previous claims that some 6 million would be subsidised.

While JobKeeper amounted mainly to a cash handout to big business, its removal is aimed at creating the conditions for widespread job cuts and restructures.

Morrison declared that continuing the program, and a six-month increase to unemployment benefits, would “dull the dynamism of the economy and prevent the adjustments that must necessarily take place.” He declared that some of the jobs destroyed over the past four months would “never return.”

Morrison sought to cover up the extent of the economic and social crisis. All figures indicate that unemployment is at its highest levels since the 1930s Great Depression, and that the global economy is mired in a massive contraction.

Official data released this week showed an 8 percent joblessness rate in New South Wales, the most populous state. The real numbers are far higher. During the pandemic, layoffs in some industries, such as tourism and hospitality, have accounted for up to a third of previously employed workers.

The rollback of pandemic subsidies will be accompanied by reductions in government spending after decades of cuts to education, healthcare and other essential services. “There will always be a case made for spending more and for spending longer, and there are plenty who are happy to make that case. But it is not a wise or responsible course,” Morrison said.

This will be combined with further handouts to big business. Morrison spoke of “boosting revenues through pro-growth policies that lift investment.” He announced the bringing forward of $7.8 billion in infrastructure spending by federal, state and local governments, and said the federal government would provide a further $1.5 billion.

Much of the money is being spent on large-scale projects, including roads, dams, council building projects and rail services, geared to the needs of mining and other major industries.

The transparent purpose is to ensure the profits of the lucrative construction and property sector, which underpins the fortunes of many of the country’s wealthiest individuals.

At the same time, regulations are to be slashed. Morrison is seeking to cut the approval time for construction and other projects under federal environmental regulations to just 30 days, sparking warnings of further environmental degradation. He also foreshadowed attempts to eliminate other “red tape” regulations, viewed as an obstacle by the corporate elite.

These initiatives are to go hand in hand with a pro-business transformation of industrial relations. Last month, Morrison announced the establishment of five groups to provide recommendations to the government on changes to workplace conditions by September.

Composed of trade union, government and corporate representatives, the purpose of these tripartite panels is to work out ways to further cut penalty rates, along with leave, sick and holiday pay entitlements, and create the conditions for a continuous pro-business onslaught on workers’ rights.

This program has the full support of the corporatised unions and the Labor Party. Speaking after Morrison yesterday, Labor leader Anthony Albanese repeated his previous calls for policies to promote “growth.”

While appealing for “equity” and a “fairer” tax system, Albanese touted the bipartisanship and “national unity” adopted by the political establishment throughout the pandemic. “We scrutinised the government’s actions and put forward constructive ideas, but even when those ideas were rejected, we acted in the national interest and voted for all of the government’s emergency fiscal measures,” he said.

In his earlier speech, Morrison had likewise hailed the coming together of business, the official parties and the unions. This “great togetherness” would need to be maintained, Morrison said, amid the “economic transition.”

The “togetherness” of Labor, the Liberal-National Coalition, the employers and the unions is directed against the working class. The purpose of the “national unity” is to stifle widespread opposition to mounting unemployment, poverty, the massive cash handouts to big business and the pittance provided to those thrown on the scrapheap.

The appeals issued by Morrison and Albanese are in preparation for the suppression of the social and political struggles that the ruling elite knows its program will provoke.

Canada’s grocery chains slash wages as pandemic continues to rage

Roger Jordan

In a highly provocative and apparently coordinated move, Canada’s three main grocery store chains announced last week that they were scrapping a $2 per hour COVID-19 pandemic “premium” or bonus, effective Friday, June 13. The decision will mean a significant pay cut for hundreds of thousands of workers who have performed, and continue to provide, an essential service amid the worst pandemic in a century.

Loblaws, Metro and Empire, the parent company of Sobeys, IGA, Safeways and other chains, introduced the bonus in late March. They did so to dampen worker anger and anxiety about being exposed to the highly contagious and potentially lethal coronavirus in their workplaces while the country was in near total lockdown.

The bonus was touted by corporate bosses and the mainstream media alike as an example of the ruling elite’s recognition of supermarket workers as “heroes.” This was a crucial element in the fraudulent narrative that everyone was pulling together in the face of the pandemic. In reality, while workers received a few crumbs, the federal Liberal government handed over more than $650 billion to the financial markets and big banks.

Loblaws’ owner Galen Weston, who possesses a net worth of $13 billion and splits his time between a spacious downtown Toronto residence and a private island in Georgian Bay, and his fellow oligarchs who control Metro and Empire, could not bear the thought of tens of thousands of store clerks dragging down their profit margins by collecting a pathetic $2 per hour bonus for a moment longer than was politically necessary.

The decision to abolish the pay premium as the pandemic continues to rage shows the companies’ shocking disregard for the lives of workers, whom they see as nothing more than slaves to build their pyramids of wealth. Last Thursday, a worker at a Loblaws-owned store in Cambridge, Ontario, tested positive for the virus, while Metro reported three new cases at stores in Mississauga and Etobicoke earlier this month. The National Post reported in late May that at least 500 grocery workers have contracted COVID-19 and several have died.

Meanwhile, the grocery chains have never had it so good, with reports suggesting profits were up by over 20 percent during the lockdown.

The decision to scrap the pay rise is connected to the ruling elite’s reckless back-to-work campaign that is being spearheaded by the Trudeau Liberal government. Against all scientific advice, workers are being told that the pandemic is effectively over and that everything must return to “normality,” i.e. ruthless exploitation, insecure employment and low wages. As Weston put it in a statement, referring to his low-paid workforce, “(W)e are confident our colleagues are operating safely and effectively in a new normal.”

For the corporate elite and its political hirelings, this “new normal” includes workers accepting that public health efforts to combat the spread of the pandemic will be abandoned. Infections and deaths must be tolerated as a part of day-to-day life—a cost of doing business for the capitalists.

This is the meaning of the Trudeau government’s threat to change the terms of the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) so that they can impose huge fines on workers and even send them to jail if they refuse to return to their jobs because of safety concerns.

The winding down of the CERB is closely connected with the grocery chains’ decision to slash workers’ wages. Even though workers receive a mere $2,000 from the CERB each month, wages in grocery stores are so low that many workers would have been better off on the CERB without the $2 per hour premium. “The wages have been kept so low in the industry,” observed Chris MacDonald, the assistant to Unifor president Jerry Dias for the retail sector, “that people were wondering ‘is it really worth risking my health and my family’s health to work, when I can just collect CERB?’ So companies had to pay that premium or they wouldn’t have had enough workers. It wasn’t out of the goodness of their heart.”

Unsurprisingly, MacDonald fails to note that poverty wages have been paid by the grocery chains with the connivance of the unions. Unifor and the United Food and Commercial Workers, which together represent over 170,000 grocery workers, have negotiated a never-ending series of concession contracts with the employers. This is illustrated by the fact that prior to the pandemic, fully 80 percent of grocery store jobs were part-time.

The UFCW issued a statement saying it was “disappointed” with the decision to remove the pay premium, while Unifor president Jerry Dias sought to appeal to the good consciences of Weston and Co. to increase pay for its poverty-wage workforce. “We have a chance to fix this. We can’t let this opportunity pass,” he pleaded.

But the unions are doing absolutely nothing to mobilize popular opposition to the grocery chains’ decision. On the contrary, they have focused on deepening their cooperation with the Liberal government and setting up a corporatist alliance with big business which has the immediate aim of forcing workers back to unsafe workplaces. This was expressed most clearly by the Canadian Labour Congress’ declaration that it is in a “collaborative front” with Canada’s main employer organizations.

Following the independent protests by autoworkers across North America that forced the shutdown of the auto industry in March, Dias and Unifor worked hand-in-glove with the major automakers to reopen the plants across Ontario as soon as possible. This move is exposing thousands of workers and their families to the risk of infection to guarantee the profits of GM, Ford and Fiat-Chrysler.

The role of the UFCW was even more brazen in Alberta, where it forced 2,000 meatpacking workers to return to their jobs amid a huge COVID-19 outbreak at Cargill’s High River plant. Even though close to 1,000 infections had been recorded in the facility and three people had died as a result, the UFCW refused point blank to organize any strike or job action by the workers. Local UFCW president Thomas Hesse insisted job action to protest these life-threatening conditions would “not be legal” under the state-designed, pro-employer collective bargaining framework that the unions uphold and enforce.

The lesson workers in grocery stores and all other economic sectors must draw is that they must build their own independent organizations of struggle—rank-and-file workplace committees—to fight for their interests. Permanent, decent-paying jobs, the availability of comprehensive testing for COVID-19, the provision of personal protective equipment to all workers, the enforcement of strict safety measures, and the shutting down of non-essential production and dangerous workplaces with full pay for all workers affected are all urgently necessary demands that such committees should take up.

The unions cannot fight for any of these demands because doing so would mean challenging the primacy of corporate profits over human life that is the brutal basis of the capitalist system. Workers must therefore link their struggle for improvements in working conditions with the fight to establish a workers’ government committed to socialist policies.