Another Failure

One of the illusions that Mrs Thatcher nurtured was that Britain was becoming a "property-owning democracy" like much of her political promises it turned out to be nonsense. 'So, an Englishman's home is no more his castle. At least, not his personally owned castle. This year, the level of home ownership among Britons is set to   plunge below that of those famous renters, the French. According to EU figures, back in 2005, 70 per cent of us owned our own homes; the most recent figures stood at 64.6 per cent and falling.' (Daily Telegraph, 3 January) Capitalism promises much but so often it fails to deliver. RD

A Wasteful Society

According to recent studies, as of 2014 the army of the United States of America is one of the strongest armies in the world,- and that comes down to money. 'The yearly budget that the United States of America government has allocated to their army is more than six hundred and twelve BILLION dollars. Yup, you read that right: more than six hundred and twelve billion dollars. It is hard to match the global firepower of a country that spends that much on an army!' (Shockpedia, 2 January)This is  because, despite not having a  battle on their own soil for tens if not hundreds of years, American troops are currently deployed in nearly one hundred and fifty countries. RD

Unpredictable Capitalism

Capitalism is forever outfoxing the so-called economic experts. A few years ago it seemed that the North Sea was a potential bonzana of potential wealth, but the promised riches have proven to be an illusion.  'Oil and gas giants are planning to slash the wages of thousands of Scottish workers by about 15 per cent. With Brent Crude is at a five-year low, American giant Chevron has announced it is to cut rates paid to agency contractors by about 15 per cent. It follows similar moves by other firms. BP has agreed with recruitment agencies in Aberdeen to lower rates by up to 15 per cent for about 450 workers from this year.' (Herald, 1st January) RD

The Socialist Compass

Humanity is at one of the most important crossroads in its history, having spread across the globe and advanced through various stages of hunting and gathering to industrial capitalism. This evolution has seen an explosion of technological progress and economic output. But now our actual existence as a species is threaten by impending environmental catastrophe. Humanity is indeed at a crossroads — and capitalism is in the way.

If you don’t know where you want to go, no road will take you there. You need to know your destination and politically that means possessing an understanding of the goal. You need a vision for the future. Socialists hold a very clear vision in their hearts and minds, a vision of a society which would permit the full development of human beings – a society which allowed everyone to develop their potential - and that would not occur because decreed and bestowed from above but, rather, as a result of the conscious self-activity of people themselves. Common ownership of the means of production and distribution is the way to ensure that our communal, social productivity is directed to the free development of all rather than used to satisfy the private goals of capitalists, groups of producers, or state bureaucrats. Production for use organised by workers themselves permits workers to develop their own capacities by combining thinking and doing in the workplace and, thus, to produce not only things but also themselves as self-conscious associated producers. This is the vision of the society we want to build. This is where we want to go. And if we don’t know that, no road will take us there. But knowing where we want to go is not enough. There a relationship between our objective, and the road we choose to take us to it. We have to now agree how to get there.

Marx and Engels used the terms interchangeably. Years later, and especially under the influence of Lenin, socialism became an intermediate stage between capitalism and communism but there is no basis for that in Marx’s writings. Lenin conceived of socialism as the first stage of communism, but this is not in Marx who sought a society of free and associated producers — “an association of free men, working with the means of production held in common, and expending their many different forms of labour-power in full self-awareness as one single social labour force.” People who say “well, that’s communism (a utopian society), but socialism has a different principle—to each according to their contribution/work/deeds is a distortion of Marx. Marx didn’t have two stages: socialism and communism. Marx had one society which comes on to the scene defective initially because it inherits all these defects from the old society. But developing that new society cannot be carried on by building on those defects. That argument goes back to Lenin, who argued that until people are highly developed, we have to have the state control where they work, how much they get, and the “socialist principle” is to each according to his contribution. But the tendency to want an equivalent for everything you do is the defect inherited from the old world. That’s what you have to struggle against, not build upon. “Only in a revolution”, wrote Marx and Engels, can the working class “succeed in ridding itself of all the muck of ages and become fitted to found society anew”.

In a Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, Engels stated:

“The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine, the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of the productive forces, the more does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage workers – proletarians. The capitalist relationship is not done away with. It is rather brought to a head. But, brought to a head, it topples over. State ownership of productive forces is not the solution of the conflict, but concealed within it are the technical conditions that form the elements of that solution.”

State ownership was only advocated to further develop productive forces to make way for socialism. But in the Communist Manifesto, it called for nationalisation of productive forces. However, this is now redundant because production is already built up. Social (common) ownership of the means of production is, of course, not the same thing as state ownership. Socialism, the creation of social wealth has only one objective – to further the interests of the people, by raising living standards, improving and extending social services and unleashing the cultural forces now stifled by the domination of capital. Socialism will not only alter the basic institutions of society in a radical way. Building upon the human capacity for practical intelligence and caring solidarity, which people have always shown themselves able to display in some measure, even under the most adverse conditions, socialism will in time change the whole tone of people’s day-to-day relations with one another. People will start to take increasingly direct charge over their affairs collectively. Labour itself will become, in Marx’s words, “not only a means of life, but life’s prime want.” People will tend to become less socially passive and competitive, and more critical-minded and co-operative. Creative labour for the good of society and the individual will be characteristic of the citizens of a socialist commonwealth, a classless society founded on an abundance of material and spiritual wealth in which the state will wither away and people will each contribute according to their abilities and receive according to their needs. By eliminating the tremendous waste caused by military production and wars, economic crises, overproduction, planned obsolescence of consumer goods, unemployment, cut-throat rivalry, and competitive advertising, the socialist state will place at the disposal of society huge amounts of previously wasted resources, production for use can be planned to meet the needs of our people without the profit-driven promotion of over-consumption and the socialist economy will create the conditions necessary to fully implement an ongoing prudent use of natural resources and ecologically minded management of the environment.

The working class is the social force in the struggle to replace capitalism with socialism. Because the system of private property is the source of its oppression, the working class can liberate itself only by abolishing this system and replacing it with a system based on social ownership of the means of production. This new system is the only one capable of doing away permanently with all of the abuses and injustices of capitalism. Unlike all previous social transformations, the socialist revolution demands conscious action by the working class. Socialism can only be achieved through the united action of millions of working men and women conscious of their social interests and the steps necessary to realise them. Because the socialist revolution seeks to substitute socially planned economic development for the existing system of exploitation of the producers, the new system cannot develop spontaneously once capitalism is abolished. It requires the conscious restructuring of social relations to eradicate the division of society into classes. Socialism can be self-sustaining because it can work. Capitalism, based on permanent expansion and accumulation of capital, can’t. Socialism is a flexible and adaptable system.

Socialism is a trinity – common ownership of the means of production, social production self-organised by workers, and production for use for all communities needs. While necessary, worker management on its own as often advocated by those who support co-operatives or syndicalism is not sufficient for the construction of socialism. The danger of sectional interests working for their own benefit rather than that of the common good remains a major problem. In a nutshell, what we mean by ‘socialism’ is a world economy controlled by workers and consumers and devoted to the needs of humanity rather than the narrow interests of business owners and their investors.  If you want to see socialism in action, simply visit your local public library. Anyone can use the public library for free. Anyone can go to the library, browse, use their computers, check out books, movies, CD’s, whatever, all for free. It is a community resource of many dimensions. The library is also somewhere to go when there’s nowhere else to go. Marx had nothing against public libraries having sat in reading room of the British Library doing his research. Even an avowed capitalist such as Andrew Carnegie couldn’t deny the social benefit of libraries and used his philanthropy to build them. Use of the public library is not means-tested. No one is making a profit.  It provides a social good that cannot be measured in dollars and cents. The same model can be applied to every aspect of society. The library shows people on a daily basis that there is another way to do things besides relying on the private-owned for-profit capitalist market. Libraries are a model that must scare those powerful men and women who cannot abide the idea of a common public good not built on a profit model. Libraries are highly subversive.

However the real issue is control of the means of production by the working class, not social services, no matter how beneficial. Otherwise, the founder of modern socialism would be Otto von Bismarck who set up the beginnings of a welfare system explicitly so as to ensure the loyalty of the working class

Ambulance Thieves

Capitalism is an awful society and by its very nature has ordinary people behaving in an outrageous fashion. 'In 2012/13, equipment was stolen from a special operations response division vehicle, while ambulances at the Scottish Ambulance Service academy in Glasgow were also targeted. Conservative chief whip John Lamont said: "The idea of thieves targeting ambulances while paramedics attempt to save lives is sickening. "People will be disgusted that this has occurred so many times across Scotland over the last three years.' (BBC News, 3 January) The thought of selfless paramedics being pilfered by petty thieves is enough to turn one's stomach. RD

Helpless Victims

In a "get rich quick" scheme many would-be entrepreneurs are hiring old clapped-out boats renting them out to desperate would-be immigrants and then abandoning them crewless at sea. 'Italian authorities have taken control of a ship carrying 450 migrants, thought to be Syrian, that was abandoned by its crew off Italy coast. The Italian coast guard said it was now heading to the port of Crotone after a rescue team managed to board the ship. The Ezadeen, sailing under the flag of Sierra Leone, lost power in rough seas overnight off the south-east of Italy. Almost 1,000 migrants were rescued from another ship found abandoned without any crew earlier in the week.' (BBC News, 2nd January) Little thought is given to the scared, exploited and often  terrified victims, but then it never does inside capitalism. RD

Fewer Teachers

The EIS teaching union has claimed that cuts in staff are making it harder to deal with bad behaviour in schools. 'The union blames falling teacher numbers, support staff cuts and falling numbers of educational psychologists. One particular concern is that pupils who might be better suited to special schools are remaining in mainstream schools without appropriate support.' (BBC News, 2nd January)  Just another example of what capitalism's priorities are when it comes to education budgets. RD

Human need, not capitalist greed

The benefits of a socialist system rests essentially on replacing profit as the primary motivator for production with mutual aid. Capitalism itself has provided the prerequisites that will bring this to the fore. It has laid the foundations of creating relative abundance for all and it has progressively eliminated the need for routine labour to produce this abundance. From the 19^th century onwards, capitalism has developed immense productive forces but it has done so at the cost of excluding the great majority of people from influence over production. It put the rights of private ownership before the collective rights of mankind. Although the world contains resources which could be made to provide a decent life for everyone, capitalism has been incapable of satisfying the elementary needs of the world’s population. It proved unable to function without devastating crises and mass unemployment. It produced social insecurity and glaring contrasts between rich and poor. Socialism was born as a movement of protest against the problems inherent in capitalist society. The capitalistic system of production, under the rule of which w live, is the production of commodities for profit instead of for use for the private gain of those who own and control the tools and means of production and distribution. Out of this system of production and sale for profit spring the problems of misery, want, and poverty that, as a deadly menace, now confronts civilisation. The essence of capitalism is the exploitation of workers and the orientation toward profit at the expense of every human being and every human need. We can never use the logic of capital to build new social relations.

One immediate problem for a post-capitalist society is that it has to emerge from conditions created by its capitalist predecessor, socialism grows directly out of capitalism, so the old division of labour cannot be magically eliminated overnight. Everyone understands that it is impossible to achieve the vision of socialism in one giant leap forward. It is not simply a matter of changing property ownership. This is the easiest part of building the new world. Far more difficult is changing productive relations, social relations in general, and attitudes and ideas. Certainly Marx saw the need for a "first phase" of socialism but only because of the low development of the productive forces of his time. This is further shown where he states: "The distribution of the means of consumption at any time is only a consequence of the distribution of the conditions of production themselves." And he also points out that "Right can never be higher than the economic structure of society and its cultural development thereby determined."

Obviously to satisfy everyone’s needs there must be the greatest of plenty of everything. In addition, there must have developed a change in the attitude of people toward work—instead of working because they have to, people will work because they want to, both out of a sense of responsibility to society and because work satisfies a real need within their own lives. Under capitalism, these private enterprises dominate the economy and operate for the purpose of generating wealth for their owners by extracting it from working people who are paid only a small fraction of what their labor produces. Socialism turns this around so that the class that produces the wealth can collectively decide how it will be used for the benefit of all. Socialism prioritises human needs and eliminates the profit motive that drives war, ecological destruction, and inequalities based on gender, race, or nationality. Like capitalism, socialism must be international so that global resources can be shared. No country can be truly independent of the global economy.

Socialism is, by definition, democratic hence an early alternative label for the socialist movement being social democracy. Without freedom there can be no socialism. Socialism can be achieved only through democracy. Democracy can be fully realised only through socialism. Since the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, Leninism and Trotskyism has distorted the socialist  tradition beyond recognition. It has built up a rigid theology which is incompatible with the critical spirit of Marxism. Lenin used Marx's philosophy to perform the socialist revolution but he completely removed Marx's notion of equality of people claiming that workers have not developed enough knowledge and consciousness, and therefore they must be guided. Socialists aim to achieve freedom and justice by removing the exploitation which divides men under capitalism, state-capitalists seek to sharpen those class divisions only in order to establish the dictatorship of a bureaucracy and of a one-party leadership. The Socialist Party supports the idea of a delegative form of democracy that calls upon the working class to decide their fate for themselves. Workers without any access to decision-making do not accept social ownership as their own, and thus may well choose to have no responsibility towards the same.

If socialism means more than state ownership or state intervention, then how should it be understood? A socialist economic system would consist of a system of production and distribution organised to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit driven by the accumulation of capital. Accounting would be based on physical quantities, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation. The characteristic of the new socialist society is that (a) control of production be fully vested in the producing individuals themselves and (b) that the social character of labour is asserted directly, not after the fact. In other words, productive activity in this socialism is social not because we produce for each other through a market but because we consciously produce for others. And, it is social not because we are directed to produce those things but because we ourselves as people within society choose to produce for those who need what we can provide. Our needs as members of society—both as producers and as consumers—are central. This is a society centred on a conscious exchange of activity for communal needs and communal purposes. It is a society of new, rich human beings who develop in the course of producing with others and for others.  The point of social ownership is to ensure that the social brain and the social brawn are devoted to the full development of human beings rather than used for private purposes.

Socialism is the science of human association reduced to a practical proposition, based upon a study of society. It is an interpretation of the past, a diagnosis of the present, and a forecast of the future. It recognizes that life is constantly passing through a process of evolution. It is therefore founded upon an enduring basis of fact against prejudice.

The common good is our fundamental purpose as a movement and as a party. Socialism aims to liberate the peoples from dependence on a minority which owns or controls the means of production. It aims to put economic power in the hands of the people as a whole, and to create a community in which free men and women work together as equals. Socialism can still continue to attract, inspire, and mobilise a social movement capable of ending capitalism’s rule. Socialism will establish a new social and economic system in which people will take responsibility for and control of their neighbourhoods and all the administrative organs, plus the production and distribution of all goods and services. The Socialist Party stands for a fundamental transformation of the economy, focusing on production for need not profit. The Cooperative Commonwealth is its goal. In the end, socialism will succeed or fail depending not on the activities of we in the Socialist Party but whether the growing anger against the injustices and failures of the present system can be channeled and linked together to create not just a call for change, but a challenge to the ruling order itself.

Fake Money Tragedy

Amidst festive celebrations  an awful tragedy struck when at least 36 people were killed in a stampede during the New Year's celebrations in Shanghai, which may have been caused by the crowd rushing to grab fake money thrown from a bar balcony. 'Another 47 injured people were hospitalised after the fatal crush in Chen Yi Square in the city's waterfront Bund area, which attracted 300,000 people last New Years Eve and is notorious for severe congestion at major events. The stampede just before midnight is the city's worst disaster since 58 died in an apartment building fire in 2010.' (Daily Mail, 31 December)  RD

Suffer In Silence

  Here is a very laid-back philosophical outlook on death from a medical man. 'Dying of cancer is the "best death" and Dr Richard Smith, a former editor of the British Medical Journal, said that cancer allowed people to say goodbye and prepare for death and was therefore preferable to sudden death from organ failure or "the long, slow death from dementia.' (Independent, 31 December)This outlook might appear to be a very calm scientific one but it is hard to imagine that the doctor concerned might not feel a twinge of regret if he had to suffer from the disease. RD

Unbearable

Mere statistics and catalogues of welfare cuts do not really capture the incompetence of the NHS. It takes a shocking example of the cruel behaviour suffered by an elderly worker to put in concrete terms the sheer criminality of the system. 'An elderly stroke patient was left lying in her own urine in a cold ward on Christmas Day, it was claimed today. Elsie Keirl, 84, was admitted to Musgrove Park Hospital - which has since launched an investigation - in Taunton, Somerset, a day after she had a stroke at her home in nearby Brigwater. Her son David Keirl, 58, stayed with her until Christmas morning before returning home for a few hours rest - but found on his return that his mother was "blue" because her room was so cold.' (Daily Mail, 31 December) RD

Ambulance Shortage

As more and more government cuts affect the NHS it is the ambulance service's turn to feel the pinch. 'Ambulance services in England are  close to breaking point with three of the country's 10  ambulance trusts declaring themselves under intense pressure . London and Yorkshire have been critical for more than two weeks. The head of the British Medical Association said patients were suffering as the NHS's emergency and urgent care system struggled to cope.' (BBC News, 31 December) The ambulance service is essential for the working class so of course it is badly curtailed to save expenditure. RD

Bust Scotland

About 1,000 companies will go bust and 12,000 Scots will be made bankrupt in the coming year, a report Business advisers BDO has predicted. Cooling consumer demand, geopolitical and financial uncertainty and potential interest rate rises were cited as causes for concern.

Bryan Jackson, business restructuring partner with BDO, said: "For many companies and individuals there is the prospect of another year of standing still as profits remain flat and incomes are static. The slightest change in any circumstances could have serious consequences… it is of concern that even six years after the start of the recession there are still so many firms going bust.”

Hard Lessons

The EIS teaching union has claimed that cuts in staff are making it harder to deal with bad behaviour in schools. The union blames falling teacher numbers, support staff cuts and falling numbers of educational psychologists. One particular concern is that pupils who might be better suited to special schools are remaining in mainstream schools without appropriate support.

In 2007 the SNP made a manifesto commitment to cut class sizes between Primary 1 and 3 to 18 or less. The average class in Primary 1, 2 and 3 has 23.3 pupils.

The latest government statistics also showed that the number of teachers in Scotland's schools fell in 2014 while the number of pupils increased. Full-time equivalent teacher (FTE) numbers stand at 50,824 which is 254 fewer than 2013 although the number of pupils in Scotland's schools is up 3,425 on the previous year to 676,955.

Whisky Galore

According Scotland’s chief statistician, barley production has grown from around 190,000 tonnes in 1914 to 2million tonnes last year. Figures also revealed the area of land used to grow barley has increased by 316% to more than 800,000 acres, from just under 200,000 acres. Yields have increased by 178% to 2.55 tonnes per acre, from just under one tonne per acre previously.

According to farm minister Richard Lochhead, around 30% of the 2013 crop – 600,000 tonnes – was used by the brewing and distilling industries. “Over the last 20 years, the barley area has represented around 70 per cent of the area of all cereals grown in Scotland, and around half of all crops,” said Mr Lochhead. 

In the past 20 years, barley has made up around 70% of the area of cereals grown in Scotland and around half of all crops. In the first half of the 20th century, the area of barley grown in Scotland didn’t exceed 247,000 acres.

Let’s be blunt, and despite some peoples fondness of a wee dram, say clearly whisky isn’t a beneficial nutritious food and the barley not grown for food but as a cash-crop for the distilleries  means it isn’t available for livestock or people.

Fracking Media Silence

Professor John Robertson who accused the BBC of pro-No bias in its coverage of the referendum campaign has turned his attention to an apparent media silence on the subject of fracking in Scotland. In a survey of a recent 30-day period of news coverage of fracking he concluded that the Scottish national press and broadcasters have hardly covered the question at all, at a time when it is attracting headlines in the UK press and also in the frack-friendly US.

During the period. The Scotsman, Daily Record and Daily Express carried one story each, while the Daily Mail had seven, most of them critical of anti-fracking opposition and especially the decision of the Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, to ban the industry in his state due to health and environmental concerns. The Herald news headlines and BBC’s Reporting Scotland made no mention of fracking, while STV’s Scotland Today reported fracking once.

“Scotland’s mainstream media, including of course our ‘Public Service Provider’ BBC Scotland, cannot be accused of distortion bias in their coverage of the debate on shale-fracking, because they just didn’t cover it at all,” writes Robertson. “Much more difficult to prove that distortion bias is bias by omission, where the electorate is kept ill-informed and where the media can insist that they don’t cover it because it’s not ‘newsworthy'; that no one is interested in it.” Prof Robertson points out that the event may have attracted a great deal of attention on social media, but very little in the mainstream media. Speaking to Newsnet.scot he made the point that Scottish TV news in particular is dominated by murders, violence, road accidents and sport.

The question is: why? Prof Robertson concedes that this brief study could not reach conclusions. However, his research does point out factors of interest to news desks and editors around the country. Fracking is raising serious concerns within central Scotland, and especially local communities such as Falkirk and Grangemouth, where the processing plant operator Ineos has announced significant investment plans related to the industry.

Robertson argues that there was ample reason to find fracking newsworthy. He cites the UK HM Chief Scientific Adviser’s annual report, which raised questions about fracking. During the last month there have also been significant reports about fracking and local health in the US, concerns that underpinned the New York Governor’s decision. A US survey of 400 peer-reviewed papers into shale gas found that 96 per cent of them drew conclusions on adverse health impact.

A group called Concerned Health Professionals of New York stated: “A significant body of evidence has emerged to demonstrate that these activities are inherently dangerous to people and their communities. Risks include adverse impacts on water, air, agriculture, public health and safety, property values, climate stability and economic vitality.” In Ohio just before Christmas, families in Monroe County were evacuated and a “no-fly zone” instigated for more than a week because of an uncontrolled gas leak from a fracking well, one of several incidents reported in the US this year alone.

In the UK, concerns are being echoed either by local authorities such as North Lanarkshire Council – which has called for a moratorium – and community groups. Scotland’s public attitude to fracking is ill-defined. In Scotland, despite the existence of a thriving shale oil industry in West Lothian until the early 1960s, it has been assumed widely that the country’s geology means that the profitable extraction of onshore oil or gas is very unlikely.

Fracking had a lower political profile until 2014, when Ineos signalled great interest in the industry in two ways. Firstly, the company is investing £300m to create docking and handling facilities for tankers carrying US shale gas to the UK and European markets. This deal was at the root of a dispute with trade unions over planned changes to work practices at the company’s Grangemouth plant last year.

Next, Ineos – a rapidly growing player in the chemicals’ market – declared its intention to become a major player in shale in the UK, setting aside more than £500m for that purpose. Ineos bought the rights to explore fracking for shale gas in a 127 square mile area around Grangemouth and the Firth of Forth. This has made the company, and the area, the focal point of anti-fracking protests, and hundreds of people participated in a protest march from Falkirk to Grangemouth this month. Without being specific it appears to be willing to back, or even lead, fracking-based exploration. The company has embarked on a major propaganda campaign to promote its enthusiastic embrace of shale gas. That latter move is at the root of concerns about possible fracking in Scotland. Protestors are wary that Ineos may use its clout – as it did so successfully during that union dispute – to force through planning decisions. It is likely that outside of the environs of Grangemouth refinery , there will be little benefit but significant risks to communities in the Central Belt.

When fracking – or “hydraulic fracturing” – was first discussed in the UK, the media focus fell on communities in England, where companies are already involved in putative exploration of onshore oil and gas from shale. Protests at Cuadrilla’s test drilling in the Home Counties raised the profile significantly. Chancellor George Osborne proposed in his Autumn Statement to create a “sovereign investment fund” to benefit northern England if fracking is successful there and the Coalition government appears determined to issue licenses. The Scottish Government has kept its public response low-key to date. This may be on the assumption that the problem will go away because of Scotland’s geology, although some opponents suspect that Ministers may be swung by the emergence of some new oil or gas bonanza to be realised onshore. The crash in global coal and oil prices may delay this activity in Scotland.

His view of the media as a corporate channel that publishes or broadcasts only corporate “news” is underlined in his research. He comments: “Those who lead the media are part of those inter-locking elites revealed long ago by people like Noam Chomsky, who work daily in their own interests which in turn are the interests of those same elites – employers, industry executives, senior civil servants, speculators, military chiefs, government ministers, lawyers and, uniquely in Scotland, the Labour Party leadership”. He adds: “Further closing off any opportunities for alternative voices is the reliance of hard-pressed reporters on press releases from the corporations that come to dominate the news.”

PS The BBC Scotland’s environment correspondent David Miller has confirmed via Twitter that he starts work on a fracking documentary January 5th. No transmission date given yet.

Taken from here

A Nasty System

£1.57billion is the amount that the UK's Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimate that prostitution contributed to the economy in 2012, following a decision by the EU that  illegal drugs and prostitution should be counted as part of a country's Gross Domestic Product. 'The ONS estimates that: about 61,000 people work in prostitution in the UK the average cost per visit is about £67 - each prostitute sees about 23 clients per week, working 52 weeks a year - in total about 1,200.(BBC News, 31 December) These less than flattering statistics illustrate what a nasty system capitalism really is. RD

Infant Slayer

The boom in supplying guns to the public has reached the crazies peak possible with a two-year old becoming the slayer of his mother. 'A woman in the US state of Idaho has been killed after her two-year-old son accidentally shot her with a gun he found when reaching into her handbag. The woman, named by the local sheriff's office as Veronica J Rutledge, 29, was shot in a Wal-Mart in Hayden, a town in Idaho's northern panhandle. She had been shopping with several children at the time, a spokesman for the office said.' (BBC News, 31 December) There is no limit to the sale of weapons despite the social cost. RD

Pollution And Profits

Michael Greenstone, the Milton Friedman professor of economics at the University of Chicago who runs the Energy Policy Institution there, has come up with a far from surprising conclusion about  pollution. 'When one compares pollution readings from around the globe, it is evident that lower-income countries tend to have higher pollution.' (New York Times, 30 December) China and India are leading polluters simply because it is a more profitable way to carry out business. RD

Big Bucks Big Bangs

It is often difficult for UK observers to understand the fascination the USA seems to have with the possession of guns. Take the city of Chicago for instance. Although the city is on track to register its lowest murder rate in decades the number of shootings has risen in 2014. 'More Chicagoans were shot and wounded than in 2013 when the final tally reached 2,182 . This year has even closed with a grim bang, with five people killed and 18 shot over the weekend.' (Economist, 29 December) Over-looking the peculiar history of gun possession in the USA the major  factor is of course the power and influence of the gun manufacturers. RD