The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)  has a legal duty to review government policies to ensure they are not racially discriminatory, and that they comply with equalities legislation.

In its latest damning report EHRC concluded that the Home Office broke equalities law when it introduced its hostile environment immigration measures.  The EHRC study detected “a lack of commitment” within the Home Office to the importance of equality.

Negative consequences of the hostile environment were “repeatedly ignored, dismissed, or their severity disregarded”, the report found. “This happened particularly when they were seen as a barrier to implementing hostile environment policies in a highly politicised environment.” The department’s approach to its legal duty to ensure that its policies complied with equality legalisation was “perfunctory”, half-hearted, in other words.

It found that officials failed to appreciate the severity of the negative impacts of its policy on this group of people. Even when the damaging consequences of the hostile environment policies began to emerge, the department failed to engage with representatives of the Windrush generation. 

The report found “there was a narrow focus on delivering the political commitment of reducing immigration, and a culture where equality was not seen as important. Identifying risks to equality was therefore not encouraged.” The EHRC detected an organisation-wide “lack of commitment, including by senior leadership, to the importance of equality and the Home Office’s obligations under the public sector equality duty. There was a misconception by some officials that immigration was exempt from all equalities legislation.”  

A series of hostile environment policies were introduced by Theresa May from 2012 during a drive to bring down net migration; the measures made it harder for people without documentation proving their right to be in the UK to get jobs, rent properties, access healthcare and open bank accounts. Large numbers of people who had the right to live in the UK, but no documentation, were adversely affected by the policies.  It was very politically charged environment; there was a very clear direction to reduce immigration. The Home Office did not comply with its obligations under the public sector equality policy.

Satbir Singh, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said campaigners had repeatedly warned the Home Office that hostile environment policies would lead to serious discrimination.

“Successive home secretaries ignored these warnings. Today’s landmark EHRC report confirms that this was not only dangerous, it was unlawful. The Home Office has for too long cared more about its reputation and its political objectives than the real-life consequences of its decisions on individuals.”

Halima Begum, director of the Runnymede Trust, said: “This latest report is yet more evidence of the discriminatory nature of the government’s hostile environment. The report’s findings are nothing short of a national scandal.”

A September 2020 IPPR research paper reported “hostile environment” policy has fostered racism, pushed people into destitution and wrongly targeted people who are living in the UK legally. The measures also failed to achieve their key objective of increasing the numbers of people choosing voluntarily to leave the UK.

An independent review into the causes of the Windrush scandal found that he Home Office demonstrated an “ignorance and thoughtlessness” towards the issue of race and the history of the Windrush generation consistent with elements of the institutional racism. Warnings were repeatedly ignored. The scandal was “foreseeable and avoidable”, and came about in part because of “officials’ poor understanding of Britain’s colonial history”.

Back in March 2019, a public accounts committee report, said the Home Office made life-changing decisions based on incorrect data and remains complacent about its systemic and cultural problems and that it  displayed a lack of concern for the impacts of its immigration policies on people without documents.

Even earlier, the National Audit Office in December 2018 criticised officials for poor-quality data that wrongly classified people as illegal immigrants, the risky use of deportation targets, poor value for money offered by hostile environment policies, failure to respond to numerous warnings that the policies would hurt people living in the UK legally. While in July of that year, the home affairs committee said that “Windrush generation” have been treated as if they were in the country illegally despite being lawfully resident for many decades. People have lost their homes and their jobs and been refused healthcare, pensions and access to social security. And a month previous the Joint Committee on Human Rights took the view that there was in all likelihood a systemic failure.

Home Office broke equalities law with hostile environment measures | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian

 The UN’s Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)  called for an immediate stop to the continuing siege that has caused a near-collapse of economic activities in Gaza and a poverty rate of 56 percent.

“This unfair blockade in which two million Palestinians are kept inside Gaza should be lifted immediately. They should be allowed to move freely, do business, trade with the outside world and reconnect with their families outside of the Strip,”  Mahmoud Elkhafif, coordinator of the Assistance to the Palestinian People of UNCTAD, said. “The situation is going to get worse if the blockade continues.”

“Unless Palestinians in the Strip get access to the outside world, it is difficult to see anything but underdevelopment being the fate of the Gaza Palestinian society,” said  Richard Kozul-Wright, director of the Division on Globalization and Development Strategies at UNCTAD. “It is really shocking that in the 21st century, two million people can be left in that kind of condition.”

The isolation of the Strip has not prevented the coronavirus pandemic from reaching Gaza, worsening an already critical situation. As of Monday, 14,768 people had contracted COVID-19, with 65 deaths. Health authorities in Gaza warned of an imminent catastrophe if Israel continued to block humanitarian access as well as the entry of necessary health equipment and medical supplies. Hospitals and healthcare staff are in need of protective clothing, ventilators and beds.

“The health crisis is exposing the underlying conditions that have been worsening over a decade,” said Kozul-Wright.

Over 1m Palestinians under poverty line in besieged Gaza: UN | Palestine | Al Jazeera

 Tesco has drawn accusations of racial profiling and fuelling discrimination after displaying anti-shoplifting signs in Romanian.  The posters singled out Romanians and were evidence of a prejudicial attitude towards the diaspora.

“Hoții din magazine prinși for fi urmăriți penal” (Shoplifters caught will be prosecuted) said the posters, which were placed along aisles with expensive items, such as alcohol.

“Tesco has used a heavy-handed and discriminatory approach that not only will not discourage shoplifters but also offend the majority of law-abiding and well-integrated Romanians living in the UK,” Alexandra Bulat, the chair of Young Europeans, “Many of them will be customers of the chain – I am one of them. EU citizens living in the UK are no more likely to commit a crime than British citizens.”

 The Romanian daily newspaper Libertatea, said: “The idea that ‘the Romanian is a thief’ is programmatically induced in the masses. That is, to be Romanian means to be a criminal. This phenomenon is a very serious matter. Terrible violence has taken place in history around these phenomena.”

Romanians in the UK have often been stereotyped and baselessly maligned by the far right as taking employment opportunities from the British people. Romanians are the second-biggest immigrant community in the UK, with many working long hours in British supermarkets, farms and hotels.

Tesco accused of racism with Romanian anti-shoplifting posters | Romania | Al Jazeera

 Even before the pandemic surfaced nearly a year ago, an estimated 690 million people around the world were undernourished, 144 million or 21 per cent of children under five-years-old were stunted, and about 57 per cent of people in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia could not afford a healthy diet. The COVID-19 pandemic may add between 83 and 132 million people to the total number of undernourished in the world this year alone, depending on the scale of the economic slowdown, according to preliminary assessments.

Yet we do produce enough food for the world’s 7.8 billion people. It’s our food systems that are broken. Hunger is rising even as the world wastes and loses more than one billion tonnes of food every year.

Our food choices matter not just for health and social justice, but also for their impact on the climate and bio-diversity.  The current food system responsible for around 21 to 37 per cent of total greenhouse gas emissions.

Africa is a huge net importer of food but 75 per cent of crops grown in sub-Saharan Africa are produced by smallholder farms, with family farms estimated to number over 100 million. Women do the bulk of weeding work while three-quarters of children aged 5 to 14 are forced to leave school and do farm labour at peak times.

Post: Edit (blogger.com)

 Hunger is not new in America. Even before the pandemic, 35 million people relied on food banks every year, according to Feeding America. But the pandemic has been catastrophic – despite initial lauded federal interventions such as the stimulus cheques and enhanced unemployment benefit. As many as 54 million people could experience hunger this year, including a quarter of all children.

Millions of Americans must rely on charity to put Thanksgiving dinner on the table this year, as hunger surges amid the Covid-19 pandemic.

 Less than half of US households with children feel “very confident” about having enough money to afford the food needed over the next month. 

 5.6m households struggled to put enough food on the table in the past week.

Families of color are suffering disproportionately with 27% of Black and 23% of Latino respondents with children reported not having enough to eat sometimes or often over the past week – compared with 12% of white people.

Overall food insecurity has doubled since last year due to record unemployment and underemployment rates. For families with children, hunger is three times higher than in 2019.

“We’re now seeing families who had an emergency fund but it’s gone and they’re at the end of their rope. We’re going to be doing this for a really long time, and that’s frankly terrifying given the impact hunger has on physical health, learning and development for children and parents’ stress,” said Kristin Warzocha, president of the Greater Cleveland Food Bank.

 “Hunger isn’t hidden anymore,” said Trisha Cunningham, CEO of the North Texas Food Bank. “If it isn’t you, then this is your neighbor, this is your child’s classmate, this is your hairdresser.”

According to the Lakeview pantry CEO Kellie O’Connell. “The pandemic has brought to light how normal wasn’t working for so many people, especially black and brown communities.”

‘No end in sight’: hunger surges in America amid a spiraling pandemic | Food | The Guardian

With every crisis within capitalism the price of it is paid by the workers in some way or other. With the COVID-19 pandemic while the pharmaceutical industries and the online home-delivery businesses and the booming stock-market look to the future with optimism, ordinary workers can expect more austerity cuts.

Millions public sector workers are to have their pay frozen. “This is austerity plain and simple,” said Dave Prentis, general secretary of Unison, the public sector union. 

“For all the government’s talk of levelling up, this spending review will level down Britain, hitting key workers’ pay and breaking the government’s promises to the lowest paid,” said Frances O’Grady, TUC general secretary.

Many retired workers will now see their future pensions reduced. A personal finance analyst at the investment platform Hargreaves Lansdown, said: “This is a horrible blow for pensioners, who will pay the lion’s share of the eye-watering cost of this move.”

Ignoring the increased plight of those in developing and undeveloped countries, the UK is to cut the amount given to foreign aid. Andrew Mitchell, a former Conservative international development secretary, said the aid cuts “will be the cause of 100,000 preventable deaths.”

 Nearly half of families with children have been forced into some form of debt since the start of the pandemic, prompting warnings that Britain risks becoming a nation “surviving on credit”.

Almost 18 million people, a third of the population, have had to use credit cards, go into their overdraft or borrow from friends and family since March. 3.6 million families have been pushed into debt. One in 10 families with children had been forced to sell belongings to make ends meet since March, while three in four parents had worked extra hours or taken on an extra job.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) said more families now risk being pushed into economic hardship and groups who already faced poverty were likely to see their income reduced further, because coronavirus was “exacerbating existing inequalities”.

People on furlough were considerably more likely to be borrowing money, with half of those who have been furloughed since March falling into debt, compared to 23 per cent of people who have seen no change to the employment.

Thomas Lawson, chief executive at Turn2us, said financial resilience across the UK was at an “all-time low.” 

“Even if a vaccine for Covid-19 became available tomorrow, the damage has been done to people’s finances. People have spent their savings and used up their rainy day funds, there is nothing left,” he said.

Nearly half of families forced into debt since start of pandemic, figures show | The Independent

 Further to the earlier post on the impact of the corporate ownership and control of farming, this research paper also has some insightful points to dwell upon on our attitude to food production.

 ‘…“Feeding the world” is the principal public relations gambit of international agribusiness. Only agribusiness has the yields to save the poor and starving, is their claim. If the scarcity narrative is true, that claim is powerful. It transforms agriculture into a moral issue. Pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and monocultures may have negative consequences, goes the narrative, but they are the necessary alternative to starvation. The sole alternative, accordingly, is merely a luxury for the privileged and of no interest to policymakers. Alternatively, if scarcity is a myth, then all pesticides are sprayed, and all GMOs exist, exclusively for profit. The destruction of the ecosphere, which is largely for the sake of agriculture, is effectively a waste. The stakes are high. Agribusiness stands or falls on this point…

…  there is abundant, even overwhelming, evidence that agriculture, and in particular industrial monocultures, needs to be realigned to become kinder to ecosystems and more beneficial for the individuals and the communities that feed us. This will not occur, however, until the scarcity narrative is set aside…’

There has been an over-emphasis on the production food by the international bodies which has benefited the business models of the corporations. Even if the FAO targets of increasing food production by 2030 by 70%, hunger will still persist.  There will be only “Modest reductions in the numbers undernourished” and other estimates suggest only 120 million out of the 850 million hungry will be lifted out of their hunger. 

But the problem has never ever been about producing sufficient food to feed everybody but always about ensuring a fair and equitable distribution of existing food stocks.  In 2018, even though food production did subsequently increase, and food prices fell, the number of malnourished rose to 821 million. If FAO wants to solve hunger, their own model is telling them to look elsewhere than increasing production. 

 In 2011 researchers from the World Bank Institute proposed that the world already produced enough food for 14 billion people. This number is well above UN population predictions, which are expected to reach 10–11 billion in 2050 and to then decline thereafter.  Before the 2007/2008 price spike caused by changes in US and EU biofuel policies , food prices had been falling at approximately 4% per year. The apocalyptic scenarios inspired by Paul Ehrlich’s ‘Population Bomb’ proved to be fantasies. Food supply significantly exceeds current food demand and that the gap is if anything widening. The scare-mongering projections are “overestimating demand or underestimating supply, or both.”

 Farming for fuel.

 ActionAid in 2013 concluded that the G8 countries consumed annually enough biofuel, mainly ethanol, to feed 441 million people. If measured today that figure would undoubtedly be much greater. The ‘green’ case for bio-fuels has been increasingly challenged and determined to be market-driven by vested interest lobbying than for making a meaningful contribution to lowering levels of greenhouse gases.

Food for Profit

 Bangladesh has one of the highest population densities in the world, a population of 160 million resides in an area the size of New York state and one of the highest poverty and food insecurity rates. However, although wheat yields are about half that of winter season rice in Bangladeshi conditions, the market price of wheat is higher and the input costs are much lower.  Bangladeshi farmers therefore grow wheat on 415,000 hectares. Such farmers are chasing markets not nutrition.

The most glaring instance of chasing high prices and high profits is the meat industry. Historically, much meat and dairy production took advantage of marginal land that was less suited or unsuited to growing crops. Increasingly, however, especially in many “developed” countries, prime arable land is devoted to animal feed. Even the most efficient converters of non-vegetarian food (fish and chickens) yield a worse caloric return per hectare than the least nutritious vegetable, while the least efficient (beef) yields approximately fourfold less again. Thus it has been estimated that beef, in a feedlot system, has a feed conversion efficiency, measured in calories, of 3% (compared to chicken with 12%).  35% of the US corn crop goes to animal feed.  One estimate is that 4 billion additional people could be fed if animals were absent from the global food chain.

In 2002, OECD countries spend $318 billion annually on agricultural subsidies, overwhelmingly going to support either meat or biofuels ). Virtually none of it goes to subsidizing fruits and vegetables.

Better Farming Methods

the growing use of mixed cropping, agroecological production systems, and conservation agriculture further increase yields beyond the monoculture. The yield potential of rice is standardly estimated at 8–10t per hectare. Such high yields are assumed to occur only under agronomic conditions of very high fertilizer and chemical inputs and with ideal soil and watering regimes. Yet the world record for rice production is 22.4 t per hectare. This record was achieved with few inputs by a farmer using a method called the System of Rice Intensification (SRI.)  Yields achieved by SRI are sustainable with productivity exceeding comparative global models by several multiples. SRI methods have also been applied to other crops, again giving significant yield improvements. Since rice is the staple of half the globe (3.5 billion people) it can be readily appreciated that a tripling of yields, especially since SRI is a more sustainable method, represents the potential to feed perhaps a further 7 billion people,

Food Reserves

 Agricultural production exceeds consumption at the global or local scale. If we take cereals (wheat, rice, barley, millet, sorghum, and oats) as an example, excess production occurs even in densely populated countries such as India and China. In 2017, FAO estimated global stores of cereals at 762 million tons. These stocks represent an insurance against calamity. However, this 762 million tons also represents an excess of supply over global demand. Depending on the climate, the quality of storage, and the crop species, they may rot or be eaten by pests.  If stocks are not growing, crops may still be entering them at a high rate. The second relevant property of stocks is that, if there are multiple harvests per annum, quantities of lost stocks may represent multiples of the steady-state amount of an annualized store. For example, if 33% of each rice crop is lost in storage and there are three rice storage periods, corresponding to three harvests, then 100% of the annual total stock is, in effect, lost each year.  Even if stored well, stocks eventually degrade. In China, wheat stocks are considered by analysts to last maximally 3–4 years and an average of 2 years. For this reason, China, which is one of the biggest stock holders of rice and wheat, began a biofuel policy to consume excess stocks of wheat. This has steadily grown and now generates 845 million gallons of ethanol per year . Despite this program, Chinese wheat stocks are still growing.

How much of the global grain supply is lost in storage?  FAO estimates that postharvest losses in low–middle-income countries are approximately 6.4% for cereals. Most cereal and pulse loss estimates are much higher, but also highly variable and they acknowledge much uncertainty . Estimates include 20%–30% for maize in Africa (Tefera et al., 2011); 12% and 44% for maize in the West Cameroonian highlands during the first 6 months of storage ; 11%–17% for rice in India, without counting storage ; and 35% for rice in India. Some reports estimate very high levels, for example, 59% after 90 days in sub-Saharan Africa.  FAO’s figures for postharvest losses are very much at the low end.  This is not to say that stocks and reserves are undesirable or unnecessary it potentially meets the cereal needs of perhaps 1–2 billion people, even without counting the losses of more perishable (noncereal) crops.

To sum up, the world can provide food for an extra 12.5 billion people above its present population and that is a very modest estimate.

 Libcom have posted an interview with  two members of Workers’ Initiative in Poland involved in the Women’s Strike movement against restrictions on abortion. The blog believes it is worthy of a wider audience so hence the link to it.

The Women’s Strike in Poland: Freedom of Abortion, Freedom from Exploitation (libcom.org)

 Elon Musk surpassed Bill Gates as the world’s second-richest person, only a week after he overtook Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg to become the third-richest. In January, Musk was in 35th place.

Driven by a further surge in Tesla’s share price, the 49-year-old entrepreneur’s net worth rose by $7.2bn (£5.4bn) to $127.9bn. It has soared by more than $100bn this year – outranking everyone else on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, which lists the world’s 500 richest people.