Tell Me About Australia Awards Africa Short Course 2022:
Africa is highly sensitive to both existing climate variability and projected climate change. As a result, governments, industries and communities throughout Africa will be increasingly required to respond to and mitigate the impacts of climate change.
The ANU Institute for Climate, Energy & Disaster Solutions (ICEDS) has developed this intensive 6‑week online course to provide professionals employed in government, non-government organisations (NGOs) and the private sector in Africa with a synoptic and contextual understanding of climate change adaptation and mitigation options.
What Type of Scholarship is this?
Short Course
Who can apply for Australia Awards Africa Short Course?
Course Requisites
To participate in this course, you must be based within one of the specified countries: Algeria, Burundi, Central African Republic, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libya, Malta, Morocco, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda
The course will be taught in English, and participants must have English language proficiency (written and spoken) to at least ‘completed secondary school’ level.
Participants are expected to hold a professional mid- or senior-level position in policy, practice, research or reform, whether in government, civil society or the private sector. We expect participants to have completed secondary schooling and at least three years’ tertiary education, have at least three to five years of work experience at mid- to senior-levels, and have a reasonably good understanding of the subject matter.
As participation in this course is likely to intersect with your work duties, we require you to submit a letter of support from your workplace as part of your application for this course. See the attached sample letter for guidance. The letter should reflect a clear understanding of the commitment of a minimum of 37 hours of course participation.
Who Should Enrol
We encourage professionals working in government, NGOs or private business on issues related to climate change adaptation, mitigation and/or disaster recovery to enrol.
Which Countries are Eligible?
Note that this course is available to participants from the following countries (region 2): Algeria, Burundi, Central African Republic, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Libya, Malta, Morocco, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Tanzania, Tunisia, Uganda
Additional courses (soon to be advertised) will be open to participants from other African countries in 2023.
Where will Award be Taken?
Online
How Many Scholarships will be Given?
Not specified
What is the Benefit of Australia Awards Africa Short Course?
This course is being delivered under the Australia Awards program. There are no fees associated with submitting an application, nor are there course fees for participants who are selected onto the course.
As a participant on this course, you will receive a contextual understanding of the science for identifying and defining climate change impacts and vulnerability, development implications, legal frameworks, governance, sectoral contexts and socio-economic rationales underpinning climate change adaptation and mitigation. You will acquire knowledge to assist evidence-based policy development and reform, enhance interpretation and analysis skills, and explore socio-economic impact and policy intervention.
This intensive 6-week online course is highly interactive with a mix of lectures, group activities and interactive sessions, providing participants with formal and informal learning opportunities from leading Australia- and Africa-based academics.
How Long will the Program Last?
Fri 01 Jul 2022 – Fri 12 Aug 2022
18:00 – 22:00
How to Apply for Australia Awards Africa Short Course:
To apply for this course, you must create a profile with CCE (requiring your name and an email address) and then you must complete the course application form (via this CCE website). The application form includes questions for you to answer relating to demographics, language, your current and previous relevant work experience, and your reasons for applying for this course. The application form also asks for you to attach 3 mandatory documents:
evidence of your English language proficiency (i.e. evidence of your IELTS test score, TOEFL test score, or a formal writing sample) – mandatory requirement,
a Letter of Support, Letter of Response, OR Letter of Recommendation (depending on your employment circumstance) – mandatory requirement, and
your curriculum vitae – mandatory requirement.
Letter of Support/Response/Recommendation
If you are currently an employee, you must attach a Letter of Support (on official letterhead) from your employer and signed by a supervisor, stating that they support your application for this course. We advise that you use the sample letter here: Sample Letter here (DOC, 20 KB)
If you are currently self-employed, you must attach a Letter of Response (on official business letterhead) that is signed by you and outlines the role you play in your business/organisation, the length of time you have held this position, and major activities you have lead or been involved in over the past 2 years.
If you are currently unemployed or studying, you must attach a Letter of Recommendation from a previous employer (employment within past 2 years) OR from a community-based organisation that you have undertaken work for within the past 2 years OR from the institution where you are studying. The Letter of Recommendation must be on official letterhead and signed by a previous or current supervisor, or by a lecturer/convener.
A wave of wage strikes is spreading across Brazil among different sections of the working class in response to explosive inflation rates that have built up over the last two years of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The official inflation rate in 2021 hit a high of 10 percent, the highest since 2015. The increase is even more dramatic in food prices, which in February registered a 13 percent increase over 12 months. A sharp increase of 25 percent in fuel prices was announced by Petrobras at the beginning of March, following the global price hike. Vehicular natural gas saw a 38 percent increase in 12 months, ethanol 36 percent, and gasoline 32 percent.
Striking teachers assembly in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerias, March 31 (Credit: Luiz Rocha - Sind-UTE/MG)
Since February, educators across Brazil have declared strikes demanding that state and local governments implement a 33.24 percent adjustment in the “teacher’s national minimum wage” approved that same month by Jair Bolsonaro’s federal government. The minimum wage for educators working 40 hours a week stands now at 3.845 reais (US$811) a month.
• On February 9, Piauí state teachers declared a strike disrupting the beginning of the school year. After refusing a 16 percent raise counterproposal made by the government of Wellington Dias of the Workers Party (PT), the strike movement in the state continues. Last Wednesday, when the strike had completed 49 days, teachers held a demonstration in the state capital Teresina alongside public transportation workers also on strike for better salaries.
• On February 16, Acre state teachers went on strike, joined a week later by their colleagues in the municipal network of the state capital, Rio Branco. The movement forced the government to postpone the return of in-person classes in the state network, and in the municipal network. According to G1, 75 percent of schools remain closed by strikers. The teachers refused several proposals by Governor Gladson Cameli, from the right-wing Progressive Party (PP), which did not benefit all categories of educators.
• On March 7, teachers in the municipal network of Recife, state capital of Pernambuco, began a strike for the 33.24 percent raise. It ended 10 days later, achieving 23 percent for those who were already paid above the minimum wage.
• On March 9 state teachers of Minas Gerais went on strike, joined a week later by their colleagues in the municipal network of the capital, Belo Horizonte. The strike reached massive proportions, with 85 percent of the workers on strike according to a report by Agência Sindical.
Being the third richest state in the country, responsible for almost half of the Brazilian trade balance surplus, Minas Gerais pays starvation wages to its teachers, which start at 2,100 reais (US$ 443) a month, or 45 percent less than the national minimum wage. Governor Romeu Zema, from the “ultra-liberal” New Party, suggested a meager 10 percent raise for teachers, corresponding to last year’s official inflation index. After the teachers refused this proposal, maintaining their strike and staging demonstrations, the government appealed to the courts to declare the strike illegal and cut the strikers’ salaries.
In the last two weeks, strikes have multiplied at an ever-increasing pace.
• On March 20, subway workers in Belo Horizonte went on strike against the privatization of the subway being promoted by the Minas Gerais state government, threatening their jobs.
• On March 23, teachers from the municipal network of Feira de Santa, Bahia, and Dourados, Mato Grosso do Sul, declared a strike. On the same day, public employees of the National Institute of Social Security(INSS) went on strike nationally, demanding a 19.9 percent increase for three years without wage adjustments. The strike already closed INSS agencies in dozens of states across the country.
• On March 25, while teachers held large demonstrations in Belo Horizonte, municipal educators in Goiânia, capital of Goiás, went on strike.
• On March 28, teacher strikes began in Porto Seguro, Bahia, and Natal, capital of Rio Grande do Norte. On the same day, street sweepers and bus transportation workers in Rio de Janeiro went on strike for better wages, massively impacting the functioning of Brazil’s second largest city. The street sweepers are demanding a 25 percent salary increase and have already rejected two proposals from the Municipal Urban Cleaning Company (Comlurb), which initially offered a 5 percent increase and then 8 percent in installments throughout the year. The Rio de Janeiro bus drivers and fare collectors, who transport 3 million people daily, are demanding a raise to compensate for three years without adjustments.
The mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Eduardo Paes, of the Social Democratic Party (PSD), virulently attacked both strikes. Despite the broad participation of workers, he claimed that the street sweepers’ strike was orchestrated by “old figures in Rio politics (who aren’t even from Rio)” and accused workers of “acts of terrorism, vandalism and threats” against the city.
• The following day, March 29, drivers and delivery workers for apps such as Uber and iFood held strikes and demonstrations in 17 Brazilian cities, demanding better payment and working conditions. The rise in fuel prices in recent weeks, which substantially impacts them by the very nature of their work, was a substantial factor triggering the strike.
The World Socialist Web Site interviewed Rober, a striking teacher from the municipal network of Belo Horizonte, who reported on his experience and the political implications of the movement in which he participates.
Explaining the underlying problems that led educators to strike, Rober said: “Both state and Belo Horizonte teachers have suffered salary losses in recent years, but mainly losses in career plans [wage increases for years at work]. In the state, they have the problem of a large number of teachers working under temporary contracts. Recruitment programs are increasingly rare and insufficient to fill the necessary number of teaching positions. Wage increases have only been conceded after strikes, but even then were far below the demanded rates and the real inflation for poor and lower middle class consumers.”
Asked about the workers’ active participation and militancy, he reported, “I feel that the demonstrations are gaining strength, in large part given by the fatigue that the workforce is feeling from the abuses to which it has been subjected over the years. Many, even those distant from the political discussions, are realizing the losses, not only the salary losses. The posture of explicit disrespect on the part of the president, ministers, governor, mayors and secretaries has become hard to ignore.
“The sight of people sleeping on the streets and begging for food or spare change, shacks multiplying under bridges; the rising prices of many essential foods, rents, consumer goods and fuel; the frequent reports of police abuse and corruption with no action on the part of governments, even seeming that governments collaborate on this, is waking people up.”
The WSWS asked the teacher how he sees the potential for unifying the struggles of educators and other workers nationally and whether unions are striving for it. Recognizing the common nature of the problems faced by educators throughout Brazil, he said, “The unions are weakened and don’t seem very combative in defending the rights of the workforce. Even so, they are still what we have to fight, but we need to recover their strength through the engagement of the workers.”
Rober’s response, which in many ways reflect the perception of large numbers of workers, raises fundamental questions of political perspective for the Brazilian and international working class. In particular his conclusions regarding the unions deserve to be discussed in light of the experience of recent years.
The response of Brazilian unions to the social and political crisis unleashed by the COVID-19 pandemic, which deepened the fundamental contradictions of the international capitalist mode of production, is extremely revealing of the real nature of these organizations that portray themselves as representatives of the workers.
The “Balance Sheet of Strikes in 2020” published by the Inter-Union Department of Statistics and Socio-Economic Studies (DIEESE) points out that the year of the outbreak of the pandemic registered the lowest number of strikes in the last 10 years in Brazil, and a drop of 42 percent in relation to the previous year. Drawing conclusions from these figures, DIEESE stated that “There are, in conditions like these [posed by the pandemic], very few chances on the horizon for a union campaign to be successful.”
This is a delicate way of saying that, in the face of the biggest crisis of world capitalism since the first half of the 20th century, unions proved incapable of offering any protection to the working class as it suffered brutal attacks on its jobs, income and its very physical existence. On the contrary, in the name of saving the capitalist economy, the union federations negotiated wage reduction programs, forced workers into workplaces infected with the deadly coronavirus, banned strikes, and openly sabotaged the workers’ struggles that emerged against their opposition.
The experiences of public transportation workers and educators, who are at the forefront of the current wave of strikes, vividly illustrate how the unions worked against the development of an independent political response of the working class to the pandemic.
In response to an explosion of strikes by bus drivers and collectors, considered by DIEESE as the “largest striking sector” in 2020, the National Confederation of Land Transport Workers (CNTTT) directly appealed to the Brazilian state for measures to “mitigate the growing general strike movement” in its ranks. Similarly, the National Confederation of Education Workers (CNTE) has responded to dozens of educators’ strikes across the country against the unsafe reopening of schools by joining the capitalist governments and justifying their criminal policies on the false premise that damage to education “outweighs the direct risks from coronavirus.”
These experiences attest to the fact that unions are not the “only available tool” for workers to fight, but rather that to advance their struggle workers need to break free of these corrupted pro-capitalist organizations and form new ones that directly and democratically represent the rank-and-file.
A fundamental factor prevents unions from being reformed to assume a democratic and progressive character for the workers’ movement today. Formed in the early stages of industrial capitalism as nationally based reformist organizations, the trade unions entered into a historic crisis as capitalism entered its imperialist stage and have then taken an eminently reactionary character with the globalization of the economy in recent decades.
The struggle of the Brazilian workers is developing as part of an increasingly integrated movement of the international working class: the wave of wildcat strikes by Turkish workers demanding wage hikes that compensate for the explosive inflation rates; the government-attacked strike movement by railway workers in Canada and the United States; the massive strike by Spanish truck drivers against fuel price hikes; the hunger protests in Sudan and other African and Middle Eastern countries, triggered by inflation provoked by the war in Ukraine fomented by US-NATO imperialism.
On Monday, the services union Verdi and the Federal Association of Aviation Security (BDLS) agreed a new contract for airport security workers. However, this does not solve a single problem for the workers since the agreed wage increases are well below the current level of inflation.
The agreement is an attempt by the employers, with the help of Verdi, to suppress the growing resistance at Germany’s airports. Nationwide, about 25,000 workers are employed in airport security. The new contract binds them to a no-industrial-action obligation for two years. Verdi had originally announced it would only agree a 12-month deal, however, the new contract runs for 24 months, from January 2022 to January 2024.
The new pay rates fall well short of the current level of inflation, which means a cut in real wages. Inflation was already running at 7.3 percent at the end of March, according to the Federal Statistical Office, and it will keep rising. “In February, inflation was still at 5.1 percent,” the official statement of March 30 said. “In Hesse, inflation rose to 8.0 percent, the highest level in 48 years.”
The price of petrol has also long since climbed above €2 per litre. Most airport security workers rely on their own car—or even more expensive secondary accommodation—because of their irregular round-the-clock shift work.
A look at the details shows how far the agreed wage increases fall below the price hikes.
The top pay grade, covering passenger and baggage screeners, will be aligned with that of aviation security assistants. Their wages will rise by 8.3 percent in three steps over two years. Only this grade will see the first 80 cents introduced retroactively to January 1, 2022. Nevertheless, the bottom line is that they are being fobbed off with a wage rise of 4.15 percent per year, which means a real wage decrease of 3 percent per year at current inflation levels.
Wage increases in grades covering staff and goods control vary depending on the federal state in which they work. Some particularly low wages will be raised to the higher level of other colleagues over the next two years, which has led to business owners whining about the “special burden” of this long overdue measure. In general, however, the pay increase for these grades is also less than 5 percent per year, also far below the rate of inflation.
In the lowest wage grade, which has so far been fobbed off with an hourly rate of €12.32, wages will rise to €13.83 within two years. So here, too, an increase of just over 12 percent over two years equates to just 6 percent per year, again well below the inflation rate of 7 or 8 percent. And all those in this grade also must pay high petrol prices for their long daily commutes.
Lost wages from the period staff were put on short-time working, when airports were temporarily closed at the beginning of the pandemic, have never been compensated. Regardless, airport workers toiled through on the front line since the beginning of the pandemic, despite the great risk of infection. Many are unhappy and angry because at least 10 percent of the workforce was laid off during this period. The job cuts led to staff shortages and unprecedented permanent stress.
For these reasons, Verdi felt compelled to call two full-day warning strikes during the negotiations, on March 14/15 and 22, which showed that the security workers can paralyse the entire flight operations. But despite the great willingness to fight and the visible solidarity of their colleagues at the airports, Verdi has now agreed to this sell-out contract.
It joins the numerous lousy deals of the last years at Fraport, Lufthansa, WISAG and many other airport companies. Especially since the beginning of the pandemic, corporations have dropped any inhibitions and, with the help of the trade unions, have carried out spinoffs, site closures, mass sackings and wage cuts.
In the Länder (federal states), Verdi, together with the state governments, already made it clear last autumn that the union shares the “profits before lives” policy of the corporations and banks when it comes to the public sector. They have imposed a wage freeze on blue- and white-collar workers in hospitals, schools and public authorities until December 2022.
Now, the industrial action by airport security workers has been sold out. Next up is the dispute in social and educational services where Verdi is negotiating for 330,000 workers, mainly in nurseries and schools. Following a well-established pattern, Verdi carefully separates all industrial disputes to keep them under control and sell them out one by one.
The close relationship between the union leadership and management is particularly evident at airports, where Verdi officials are on a first-name basis with company managers.
The BDLS negotiators are also long-time union members. Their spokesperson, Rainer Friebertshäuser, was a Verdi member and official for 40 years before he moved to the post of labour director of FraSec, the subsidiary of the Frankfurt airport operator Fraport.
Matthias von Randow, general manager of the German Air Transport Association (BDL), was a head of department at the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB), then a state secretary in the Federal Ministry of Transport and a director of Air Berlin. In the same way, today’s trade union leaders easily move to the boardroom or government bench when the opportunity arises.
Workers have no such lucrative opportunities. They are left with all the costs: the costs of years of social cuts, privatisation and deregulation, as well as the costs of the pandemic, both health and financial.
Now they are being saddled with the costs of the Ukraine war. The coalition government headed by social democrat Olaf Schulz has just pulled an additional €100 billion out of the hat for the Bundeswehr (armed forces). Politicians are openly talking about a nuclear-armed Germany and a world war, and workers will pay for it. Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier calls for “ sacrifices ” for the war effort and to ensure profits continue to flow for German big business. Verdi and the other DGB unions stand firmly on his side.
According to media reports, the German government is planning further arms deliveries to Ukraine. A report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung states that armaments worth some €300 million could “be delivered to Ukraine in the short term.” Unlike previous deliveries, the latest shipment would not consist of military equipment from German army stockpiles, but include weapons provided directly by German industry.
Finnish BMP-1 from Soviet production [Credit: Balcer~commonswiki, CC BY-SA 3.0, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/]
The planned shipments are massive. According to the Süddeutsche Zeitung, the government’s list of weapons includes “about 200 products.” These included 2,650 Matador-type anti-tank weapons and 18 reconnaissance drones, “which could be delivered immediately.” Other items included mortars, machine guns, 3,000 night vision devices, several thousand protective vests and helmets, eight ground monitoring radar devices, airspace monitoring systems and “unprotected and protected vehicles, from touring coaches to armoured off-road vehicles.”
Apparently, Social Democrat Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht has already approved the arms deliveries. Information from “sources around the Ministry of Defence” say that Lambrecht “has no objections” to “the purchase of military equipment for Ukraine according to the list,” writes the Süddeutsche Zeitung.
Yesterday, the Welt am Sonntag newspaper reported that the German government is now even supplying tanks to Ukraine. This includes 58 gunner tanks which originally came from the stockpiles of the National People’s Army of the former East Germany and are now in Czech possession. The infantry tanks of the type “PbV-501” (also known as BMP-1) are equipped with cannons and machine guns.
After initial restraint, Germany is thus increasingly at the forefront of military support for Ukraine in the war against Russia. According to Ukrainian data, over the past few weeks, 500 anti-tank weapons, 1,000 rounds of ammunition, 500 Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and 2,000 Strela missiles have been delivered to Kiev. The heavy weapons of war demanded by Kiev are now following.
At the same time, Germany is systematically expanding its military presence in Eastern Europe. In recent weeks, 350 additional German soldiers were transferred to Lithuania with heavy military equipment to strengthen the NATO battlegroup led by the German army. In addition, the Air Force sent six Eurofighter fighter jets to Romania and 700 soldiers, as well as the anti-aircraft missile system Patriot to Slovakia, where Germany took over the leadership of another battlegroup.
The transfer of troops and the delivery of weapons, which to a large extent go to far-right forces in the Ukrainian army and the so-called territorial defence of the country, are exacerbating the war in Ukraine. These are in effect indirect acts of war against Russia, which are constantly increasing the risk of a direct military conflict with the nuclear power.
In her speech to the federal parliament (Bundestag) on the war budget last week, Lambrecht warned against Russian attacks on arms deliveries. She urged everyone “to refrain from public discussions about when what is delivered and where. Otherwise, those who carry out these deliveries will become targets.” It should not be allowed “that these transports may also become targets of Russian attacks.”
Despite the deafening propaganda in the political establishment and the media, it is becoming increasingly clear that Ukraine is a proxy war between NATO and Russia. With the military alliance’s systematic advance to the Russian border, the imperialist powers literally incited the Kremlin’s reactionary attack on Ukraine. Berlin in particular now sees war as an opportunity to implement long-cherished plans for rearmament and militarisation.
“With the ‘new epoch’ it is now finally possible for us to equip the German army with the means we need to defend the state and the alliance,” Lambrecht enthused in an interview with Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland. “The focus is on equipping the soldiers.” The “new epoch”—a propaganda term for the meticulously planned and prepared return of German militarism—“can also be felt by taking the German army to where it belongs: in the midst of society.”
Lambrecht gave an insight into the far-reaching war and great power plans of the ruling class. In the case of the EU, “there is a plan for a Rapid Reaction Force and the expectation that Germany will take part,” she said. That is why she had “offered that we would provide the core of this force from 2025—with 1,500 soldiers.” It will also involve “permanently strengthening the NATO eastern flank and not just securing it at the moment.”
Central to the implementation of the plans was the swift adoption of the “German Army Special Fund” in parliament. Last week, the defence minister had already spoken to the inspector general of the German Armed Forces, Eberhard Zorn, and Chancellor Olaf Scholz about the use of the planned €100 billion. It is particularly important to her to “procure equipment very quickly that arrives directly to the soldiers.” And then, of course, “there are the many important major projects such as the successor to the Tornado (fighter jet) or the armed drones.”
The decision to buy dozens of nuclear weapons-capable F-35 stealth bombers was followed last weekend by the plan to build a national missile defence shield. Further items will now be announced. “According to informed sources,” the German army could receive another 350 “Puma” and “thus double the number of its gun tanks,” writes the Handelsblatt. In addition, “further boxer-type wheel armour and logistics vehicles are likely to be purchased.” The report continued, “it is considered certain that the Federal Navy will receive five more K130 corvettes and one to two additional submarines.”
This is just the beginning. Four weeks after Scholz announced the largest German rearmament programme since Hitler, it has already been declared that the previous plans are not sufficient. “The magnitude of the €100 billion special fund is quickly relativised if you look at the need for ammunition alone,” comments Handelsblatt. In order to achieve the NATO target of “30 days of combat capability,” the government would have to “spend at least 20 billion on cartridges, grenades and rockets alone.”
The German armaments industry is rubbing its bloody hands and, in close cooperation with the government, preparing to produce equipment for the war machine. According to Handelsblatt, the Ministry of Defence invited the managers of the largest German armaments companies to an “emergency meeting.” The representatives of the ministry had stressed that “the existing military equipment should be upgraded and new material should be purchased as soon as possible.”
According to the newspaper, the Rheinmetall Group alone offered the federal government a list of armaments worth €42 billion. In addition to ammunition, it also includes helicopters, as well as chain armour and wheel armour. “In many plants we work in single-shift operation; we can also work around the clock,” said the CEO of Rheinmetall Armin Papperger. The production of tank ammunition could thus be increased from around 40,000 to 240,000 pieces per year.
Eighty years after the German invasion of the Soviet Union, which killed at least 27 million Soviet citizens, the ruling class is once again on a war path against Russia. At its core, it pursues the same goals as it did during World War II. German imperialism is concerned with militarizing Europe under German leadership in pursuit of its global geostrategic and economic interests. The subjugation of Russia to secure unhindered access to the country’s vast resources is the first step in this process.
“For Europe, it is now up to the German army,” writes Die Welt in in a commentary and makes a very open plea for NATO and the EU to prepare for a war against Russia—under the leadership of the German armed forces. “With regard to the strategic orientation of the German allies and the reduction of land forces, in particular armoured combat units, in other EU and NATO states, no one apart from Germany can and will provide the necessary armed forces to secure the eastern flank of NATO in such a way that the alliance could exist in a potential conflict with Russia.”
The preparations for war are accompanied by a genuine war against the working class at home. “We are a quasi-war party, a quasi-economic war party,” said Robert Habeck, the Green Minister for Economic Affairs, in the Tagesthemen on public television. “And we also pay a price … and we will become poorer as a result.” By “we” Habeck does not mean the bourgeoisie and the wealthy middle classes for whom he speaks, but the working class, which must bear the costs of the drive to war.
On March 25, the French Senate announced that it was pursuing legal action against management consultancy firm McKinsey. The investigation was led by Senator Eliane Assassi, a member of the Stalinist French Communist Party (PCF). McKinsey is accused of evading hundreds of millions of euros of tax as it advised the Macron government on COVID-19 policy, and of perjury, for lying about this to a Senate committee.
French President Emmanuel Macron. (Ludovic Marin, Pool via AP)
The report detailed massive financial corruption inside the Macron government. It has awarded McKinsey €2.4 billion in consultancy fees since 2018, including over €1 billion in 2021. The real total is probably higher, as the investigation only probed the most prominent sections of the administration. Despite a turnover of €329 million, McKinsey did not pay a cent of corporation tax in 2020.
The report stated that the government’s use of consultancy firms “had become a reflex” and that McKinsey and other firms were involved in “most of the major reforms” of the Macron government, including attacks on pensions, housing, and unemployment benefits. While private consultancy firms including McKinsey have been utilized by previous French governments, Macron massively expanded their use.
Perhaps most explosively, McKinsey advisers were reportedly at the heart of Macron’s vaccine-only policy on the pandemic, and its refusal to implement basic social distancing measures to eliminate circulation of the virus—even as over 142,000 people died in France.
US-based McKinsey has an annual revenue of $10 billion and offices in 65 countries. It charges governments and private companies exorbitant fees for “strategic management” advice, which typically leads to savage assaults on the working class. A Macron spokesperson inadvertently underlined McKinsey’s parasitism by citing the fact that the UK government has paid the firm 40 times more than the French government in recent years. McKinsey gained particular notoriety for its role in the ongoing privatization of the British National Health Service.
On Sunday, Macron’s initial response was to deny any wrongdoing, insisting “no contract is awarded in the Republic without respecting the rules of public procurement.” Speaking in Dijon on Monday, however, he distanced himself from the McKinsey affair, stating: “I am not the one that signs the contracts.” On Wednesday, his spokesperson vowed to reduce spending on outside consultancy by 15 percent.
There are extensive ties between McKinsey and Macron’s Le Republique En Marche (LREM) party. Paul Midy, deputy director of LREM, was a partner at McKinsey from 2007 to 2014. Mathieu Maucourt was a project leader at McKinsey for three years before becoming a political director for LREM and is now part of the state secretariat. Etienne Lacourt was on LREM’s direction committee until 2018 before being hired as a partner by McKinsey.
There can be little doubt that McKinsey’s evasion of taxation and their role in advising the Macron administration have a criminal character. Clearly, moreover, it has been an open secret in French government, judicial and media circles for some time. The Senate report, itself in preparation for over four months, is being brought to the fore on the eve of the upcoming presidential election.
In the run-up to the first round of the presidential election, scheduled for April 10, rival candidates are criticizing Macron over the scandal, pointing to close ties between the US-based multinational and Macron’s LREM.
Far-right candidate Marine Le Pen tweeted, “With Emmanuel Macron, McKinsey, which cost you €1 billion last year for very vague missions, will continue to gorge itself on public money, not pay taxes and lie to the Senate!” Unsubmissive France candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon responded by claiming that “with me, consulting groups will be gone.”
Les Republicains (LR) candidate Valérie Pécresse stated on Wednesday that “it seems the government has something to hide.” Pécresse supporter Xavier Bertrand described the report’s findings as a “state scandal,” calling for an enquiry into the state’s use of consultancy firms.
The rival candidates’ condemnations of Macron’s corrupt deals with McKinsey are utterly hypocritical. LR candidate Pécresse worked alongside McKinsey consultants during her tenures as Minister of Higher Education and Minister of the Budget under former French President and convicted criminal Nicolas Sarkozy. Xavier Bertrand also worked alongside McKinsey consultants.
LR’s eagerness to discredit Macron over a consultancy firm to which they are also tied reflects their eagerness to shed their own popular association with rampant corruption. The corruption cases brought against Sarkozy, who was convicted of illegal wiretapping last year, and against 2017 LR presidential candidate François Fillon are still fresh in public memory.
Candidates Jean-Luc Mélénchon of Unsubmissive France and Fabien Roussel, of the Stalinist PCF, have supported the pandemic policy advised by McKinsey and pursued by the French financial aristocracy from the beginning of the pandemic. This support was crucial in imposing policies of mass infection and death on the working class, alongside a continuous stream of bailouts to line the pockets of the corporations and the super-rich.
The focus on McKinsey, which is just one of an entire thieves’ nest of consultancy firms around the French government, underlines the cynical nature of this campaign. In reality, McKinsey accounts for only a small part of the French government’s outlay on private consultancy firms. According to the Senate report, from 2018 to 2020, 1 percent of the state’s consultancy expenditure went to McKinsey, 5 percent to Capgemini, and 10 percent to Eurogroup.
Amidst the scandal, reactionary anti-vaccine activists have jumped on McKinsey’s relationship to Pfizer to denounce any measures taken to stem the spread of the virus.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla and Chief Business Innovation Officer Aamir Malik are both former employees of McKinsey, which advised governments to buy Pfizer vaccines. McKinsey’s advice to buy vaccines was no doubt associated with criminal profiteering, which netted Pfizer alone some €30 billion in profits. Their principal crime, however, was not that they advocated the use of life-saving vaccines, but that they collaborated with the French government to refuse to scientifically implement life-saving social distancing measures.
The whole sordid affair simultaneously exposes both Macron, popularly dubbed “the president of the rich,” and his electoral rivals. All of them are complicit in the funneling of trillions of euros of public money into private hands that occurred throughout Macron’s presidency—whether it be from stock market speculation, corporate bailouts, or large government contracts. Under the cover of the pandemic, moreover, this wealth accumulation was dramatically accelerated.
In the final analysis, what the McKinsey scandal has revealed is not the personal corruption of a single man, party, or consultancy firm, but the corruption and parasitism of the entire social order dominated by the capitalist class.
The corporate assault on US workers’ living standards during the pandemic intensified in 2021. While inflation slashed living standards for most of the population, corporate profits surged to their highest levels in decades, rising 25 percent year over year to $2.81 trillion. The rise is even greater—37 percent—when taxes are factored in. This is the highest figure since records began in 1948.
Worker in an Amazon fulfilment centre (AP Photo/David McNew)
At the same time, according to a report by Compensation Advisory Partners, US CEO pay increased in 2021 by an average of 19 percent at the 50 companies surveyed, a record amount. Leading the field was Discovery CEO David Zaslav, who took in a staggering $246.6 million. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy received a pay package valued at $212.7 million, mostly from stock options.
Others cashing in included:
Apple CEO Tim Cook, who took in $99 million last year
Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger, who received $178.6 million
Chad Richison, CEO of Paycom Software, who was paid $211,131,206
Lawrence Culp Jr., CEO of General Electric, who pocketed $73,192,032
Mike Sievert, T-Mobile CEO, who received $54,914,015
Leonard Schleifer, CEO of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, who took in $135,350,121.
Surging profits on Wall Street boosted the average employee bonus in the New York securities industry to a record $257,500 last year, according to state officials.
The statistics on corporate profits and executive pay expose the blatant profiteering by large corporations during the pandemic. Companies have been able to raise prices far beyond increases in production costs, vastly inflating profit margins.
According to a report by a watchdog group, the top 25 global oil companies reaped $237 billion in profits in 2021. Last year, oil giant ExxonMobil posted its largest profit in seven years, $23 billion, as increased oil prices added $100 billion to its sales revenues. Saudi Aramco, a major oil and gas company owned and managed by the Saudi royal family, reported $110 billion in profits last year, a 124 percent increase from 2020.
Logistics giant Amazon reported $33.4 billion in after-tax profits in 2021, up from $21.3 in 2020.
Despite COVID and chip shortages, US auto companies enjoyed a profit surge. Ford recorded $17.9 billion in after-tax profits, following a loss in 2020. GM reported $14.3 billion in 2021 earnings.
The official inflation rate was 6.7 percent last year. Inflation has accelerated in 2022, with prices rising 7.9 percent year over year in February 2021, eclipsing year-over-year wage gains of 5.1 in February and 5.6 percent percent in March.
According to Bloomberg Economics, the average American household will spend $5,200 more this year to buy the same goods and services it purchased last year. With prices on basic commodities set to rise even higher due to the war in Ukraine and US and NATO sanctions on Russia, a further assault on living standards is being prepared.
Even though real wages are declining in many sectors, Wall Street is expressing concern over the tight labor market, which has allowed workers to press for higher wages. The US jobs report for March, released Friday by the Labor Department, reported the addition of 431,000 jobs, the 11th straight month of job gains surpassing 400,000. The official unemployment rate fell to 3.6 percent in March, close to the 3.5 percent pre-pandemic rate, which was a 50-year record low.
In fact, the figure for new jobs was lower than predicted by economists, and far below the average of 600,000 over the past six months. More threatening to the ruling class are near-record highs of unfilled jobs and voluntary quits.
In remarks Friday morning after the release of the jobs report, President Biden hailed the increase in hiring, citing “Record job creation. Record unemployment declines. Record wage gains.” However, the reality is quite different for workers, whose paltry wage gains are being eaten up by rising prices for gasoline, electricity, food and other necessities.
The most significant job gains have been for workers in the retail sector and leisure and hospitality, such as hotels and restaurants. These sectors have historically paid poverty-level wages.
The resistance of workers to laboring for near-starvation wages in the midst of a deadly pandemic, and ongoing supply chain bottlenecks due to shortages of workers in key sectors such as trucking, potentially put workers in a strong position to fight for significant improvements in living standards.
In 2021, strikes took place in a number of key industries as workers sought to fight back against rising prices and the impact of decades of wage stagnation. These struggles for the most part took the form of rebellions against the trade union bureaucracies, which for decades have worked to impose brutal cuts in wages and the destruction of working conditions, in line with their transformation into corporatist appendages of the corporations and the capitalist state.
In a number of contract struggles last year, unions settled for pay raises well below the rate of inflation, including Volvo (average 2 percent annually over 6 years), Nabisco (2-2.5 percent annual raises), Kellogg’s (one-time 3 percent for “legacy” workers), and Dana Corporation (as low as 1 percent annually for top pay scales).
In each of these cases, the unions sabotaged the struggles of workers, keeping the strikes isolated and shutting them down at the point where they threatened to seriously impact corporate profits and inspire solidarity action by other workers both in the US and internationally. Workers were forced to vote without having time to adequately review the terms of the contract and were often denied the right to see the full contract language.
At Volvo and other workplaces, unions called strikes only after workers had voted multiple times by massive margins against sellout agreements brought back by union officials.
In one of the latest acts of treachery, the Steelworkers union blocked strike action by 30,000 US oil workers and rammed through a sellout deal with wage increases far below the rate of inflation, even as the oil giants continued to gouge the public with spiraling gas prices.
In recognition of the vital services of the unions in suppressing workers’ wage demands and squashing strikes, the Biden administration has made a central focus of its anti-working class policy the promotion of the trade unions, appointing a “Task Force on Worker Organizing and Empowerment,” including national security cabinet officials. In a report issued in February, the task force made a series of recommendations to encourage unionization by government contractors, with the aim of “promoting stability” and “minimizing disruption”—that is, preventing strikes.
Fearing that low levels of unemployment will encourage workers to battle back against raging inflation by demanding significant wage increases, US financial authorities are taking measures to slow down the economy by increasing interest rates. Remarking on the fact that there are 1.8 job openings for every unemployed worker, US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said, “By many measures, the labor market is extremely tight, significantly tighter than the very strong job market just before the pandemic,” adding that it was tight to “an unhealthy level.”
After raising rates by 0.25 percent in March, the Federal Reserve is indicating support for a more substantial 0.5 percent rise in May. The central bank has already said it plans at least six more rate increases in 2022, the first increases in three years.
The last round of rate increases set off a precipitous fall in the stock market, inducing the Federal Reserve to rescind its rate hikes. Since then, the markets have become even more inflated as the US Treasury pumped trillions of dollars into Wall Street. The turn toward deflationary policies threatens to upset this financial house of cards in dramatic fashion.
Growing sections of workers are defying the pro-corporate unions, including oil refinery workers in Richmond, California, who have voted down two sellout contracts pushed by the United Steelworkers’ union and gone on strike to secure a substantial wage increase and an end to brutal overtime and unsafe working conditions. They are joined by 5,000 teachers on strike in Sacramento, California and tens of thousands of other workers with looming contract expirations. This is part of a growing movement of workers internationally fueled by inflation, inequality and the growing threat of world war.
Reports of the unrestrained profiteering by the financial elite will only further fuel workers’ anger over declining living standards and the criminal mismanagement by all sections of the political establishment of the pandemic. The impending war danger and the demands that workers finance another huge military buildup at the expense of wages and social services will heighten class tensions.
Yesterday, as the BA.2 subvariant of COVID-19 continued its assault, more than 1.5 million infections were reported worldwide, and over 4,000 people died from complications associated with their infections. Currently, this version of the Omicron strain accounts for 90 percent of all sequenced viruses.
Medical workers in protective equipment, Station 43 of the Berlin Charité Hospital (Image: DOCDAYS Production)
Last week also saw global deaths surge 40 percent after declines from BA.1’s ebb, with close to 46,000 succumbing as infections have risen across the globe. All told, almost one-half billion people have been infected and more than six million have died. Yet, these grim astronomical figures are known to be a vast undercounting, the best estimate places global excess deaths over 20 million.
Even as these statistics demonstrate that the pandemic is far from over, the World Health Organization (WHO) released its Strategic Preparedness, Readiness, and Response Plan to End the Global COVID-19 Emergency in 2022. The international health organization noted that two key objectives would need to be met: reducing COVID infections and early diagnosis and treatment of cases to reduce deaths. As the Hill summarized, “The WHO said that can be achieved by increased surveillance and monitoring, improving global vaccine equity, bolstering healthcare systems and supplies, as well as upgrading research and data analyses.”
None of these objective measures have been met. On the contrary, they have become acutely worse as country after country has summarily ended any public health response to the present threat. These declarations, as experience has shown, are simply a prelude to the WHO acquiescing to pressures by the capitalist governments that keep a tight rein on their activities.
Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus noted in the report, “We now stand at a pivotal and dangerous moment in the fight against COVID-19. Although it is impossible to predict precisely how the SARS-CoV-2 virus will evolve, we know that new variants will arise as transmission continues and, in many cases, intensifies. And yet we can look into the future with a sense of hope that we can end the COVID-19 pandemic as a global emergency through our actions.”
These comments are a betrayal of the international working class and their welfare. The mixture of truth couched in rhetorical optimism can only mean the WHO as a public health organization has abandoned its principles as it tries to accommodate the demands of finance capital.
In the US, where cases have plateaued at an average of more than 30,000 per day for the last three weeks as BA.2 has become the dominant variant, governors of many states have already rescinded their state’s COVID states of emergency. By April 22, only three states—Arizona, Nevada, and West Virginia—will have their emergency status in place “until further notice.” And the rise in cases is arriving as all funding for COVID-19 response has been exhausted. As reporting requirements are being curtailed, states will be flying blind through the BA.2 storm that is gaining momentum each day.
Perhaps more concerning is the detection of a new version of the Omicron variant in the UK that has combined BA.1 and BA.2. In their COVID-19 Weekly epidemiological Update published on March 29, 2022, they wrote, “The XE recombinant [BA.1 and BA.2] was first detected in the United Kingdom on January 19, and more than 600 sequences have been reported and confirmed since. Early-day estimates indicate a community growth rate advantage of ten percent as compared to BA.2, however, this finding requires further confirmation.”
The WHO acknowledged in reply that confirmation would be more difficult due to “the recent significant reduction in SARS-CoV-2 testing by several member states. Data are becoming progressively less representative, less timely, and less robust. This inhibits our collective ability to track where the virus is, how it is spreading and how it is evolving, information and analyses that remain critical to effectively end the acute phase of the pandemic.”
According to the Office for National Statistics, in the UK, COVID-19 infections at the end of March reached a record high with almost five million people being infected in a single week. This accounts for one in 13 people in England with COVID. In conjunction with the rise in cases, hospitalizations have surpassed the BA.1 peak. The average daily COVID death rate has continued to climb and is currently at 220 and quickly approaching its predecessor.
The European continent, and in particular Germany, is seeing BA.2 continue to rage. Despite the “reporting anomalies” in Germany, where multiple states had not reported data in several days, cases continue to climb. Germany’s per capita rate of infection is now higher than the peak reached in the US and the UK during their Omicron surges. The death rate is also increasing every day.
The situation will most likely grow direr as plans are underway to end mandatory quarantine for most people. More than four million people are currently isolated due to infection, impacting businesses ability to extract surplus value. Health Minister Karl Lauterbach has demanded that isolation be voluntary and to allow infected workers back on the job to address these concerns.
The complete disregard for the spread of infections and the continued evolution of the virus towards more contagious and immune-evasive forms will significantly impact the world’s population in the third year of the pandemic.
China, which has attempted to contain the virus using a Zero COVID strategy until now, is facing the full brunt of the malign neglect that characterizes the policies employed by every other country to place profits over lives during the pandemic. The virus that emerged out of Wuhan has been redirected against China as a more dangerous and formidable pathogen. The response to the virus has become a political line in the sand.
Figure 1: Daily COVID cases in March 22 China [Source: WSWS]
Indeed, suppressing the highly contagious BA.2 subvariant of Omicron is proving a difficult challenge for the Chinese authorities as more than 100,000 COVID cases have been reported domestically in March. At best, current efforts have managed to cap the community spread of infections which have affected multiple cities and provinces and dogged public health officials.
The National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China reported that yesterday’s daily case count was the largest one day total on record, with a total of 9,875 on April 1, 2022.
Approximately 4,500 of these cases were documented in Shanghai, the current epicenter of the pandemic in China and one of the world’s financial centers. The city’s two central banks—the China Construction Bank and the Bank of China—operating through the central government’s Ministry of Finance are responsible for managing capital investment funds for state enterprises.
The city’s lockdown, implemented in two phases, has perturbed global finance capital. Not mincing words, the Financial Times, the mouthpiece for financial oligarchs, in no uncertain terms asserted that “China will need a strategy to exit zero-COVID and live with the virus.” The implications of broad uncontrolled transmissions will have disastrous consequences for the Chinese working class. The Wall Street Journal noted that a large Shanghai elderly care hospital is battling a COVID-19 outbreak. They indicated some patients have died because of their infections, but Chinese officials have not corroborated these reports.
According to the Journal, “Six replacement orderlies at the city’s Donghai Elderly Care Hospital, brought in after previous caretakers were sent away to quarantine, told the Wall Street Journal that they had witnessed or heard of the recent removal of several bodies from the facility, where they said at least 100 patients had tested positive for COVID-19.”
It may be reasonable to assume that the report is accurate and would be consistent, and in line with what is understood about the lethality of COVID-19. One Shanghai physician told the WSWS, “I feel China is feeling the economic pain and is gradually lifting policies.”
These developments only underscore the need to press forward with elimination strategies against the virus and ensure life and livelihood are protected. But given the pressures being placed on China by global financial demands, a national Zero COVID strategy will be more challenging to sustain on a national level as an elimination strategy must be pursued internationally. In this aspect, the Chinese state will not be unable to find a progressive path out of the present crisis.
Meanwhile, the second phase of Shanghai’s lockdown commenced on Friday. However, given the persistent spread of the virus, authorities have said restrictions affecting areas east and south of the Huangpu River would stay in place for at least another three to ten days. This means the entire city of 26 million people is now under lockdown orders in the hopes of bringing cases back to zero. Mass testing continues to locate and map every infection.
On announcing a city-wide lockdown that will last for several days, Moody’s Analytics quickly added, “With China’s largest city closed for nine days, there will undeniably be an economic blow that will follow into the second quarter of the year.” Wu Zunyou, chief epidemiologist with the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, speaking with Global Times, countered, “Based on the experience accumulated from the past two years and our understanding of the virus’ mutations, I believe China is still able to realize the dynamic Zero COVID.”
Jilin City has announced they are exiting lockdown after three weeks despite having persistent daily cases in the 700 range. It will be critical to follow the trajectory of COVID cases in the capital city of the northern province and assess the response from the authorities. By all accounts, it remains premature to lift these stringent measures. But the statements by Moody and Wu posits the underlying contradictions that only the working class can resolve.
