Gallipoli – or why the hell do we bother to remember?

Please, take five minutes out with me to sit and think about things that matter. This was written for The Independent On Sunday yesterday.

They died in the dark, some of them. Young men, volunteers mostly, cut down by bullets and bombs, fire and fever. Australians, New Zealanders, Brits and Irishmen, Africans and Indians and many, many Turks were among those killed in the fighting at Gallipoli a century ago. On Saturday, they were remembered in the dark.

The other-worldly growl of a didgeridoo sounded out across Hyde Park Corner, calling people to assemble in their name. The long, pure, mournful sound of a Maori conch shell followed on at the start of the Anzac Day service, falling among the bright notes of the dawn chorus. The traffic had been stopped. Five thousand people stood, still and quiet, in the early morning rain. There may have been more.

“Why are we here? Because they were just like us,” said Craig, a Kiwi fitness coach in his early twenties. Many of those who died a century ago were young, strong and full of spark like his group of half a dozen who had come on from the pub to honour them. They were up all night but laughed it off, long since sober, as they waited for the ceremony to begin.

This was the time of day, in the murderous half-light, when the first of the boats began to land on the Gallipoli Peninsula on 25 April 1915. The Allies were trying to win their way through to Constantinople and knock Ottoman Turkey out of the war. They did not get far inland, and when they withdrew eight months later there had been nearly 400,000 casualties on all sides, including an estimated 131,000 deaths.

Continue reading “Gallipoli – or why the hell do we bother to remember?”

Inequality

 

Come with me on a walk that will ruin your life. It will trash your income and slash your life expectancy by decades, as we stroll from one part of London to another. But it will also demonstrate the gross inequality that is plaguing Britain and that ought to be making people mad at the start of this election campaign.

The Independent on Sunday 1 February 2015

We start just a short distance away from our ultimate destination, in one of the most privileged parts of the country, never mind London. This is Prince’s Gate, a grand Victorian terrace near the Royal Albert Hall, where planning permission has just been granted for what could become the most expensive private home in the capital.

As super-mansions go, this one looks pretty shabby. The first three houses in the terrace are yellow, like rotten teeth in a row. There is damp growing up the walls of homes that were magnificent when John F Kennedy lived here as the son of the US ambassador; but now they will be magnificent once again.

The Saudi owners want to knock all three through to create one enormous property, with an indoor swimming pool, wine cellar, gym, staff quarters and an underground car park.

With five storeys, an imposing stucco front and views overlooking Hyde Park it will be worth double what anyone has ever paid for a private home in London (at least on the record) – and all within walking distance of one of the poorest neighbourhoods in the country.

“This is prime Knightsbridge,” says Becky Fatemi of the luxury estate agent Rokstone. “If the property was refurbished and converted into a single super-prime mansion, it could be worth anything from £200m to £290m which, at the upper valuation, would make it London’s most expensive home. The Gulf royals would have the money and a trophy property like this would interest them.”

The Qatari royal family must be in the market, having been turned down a few days ago for a similar project in Regent’s Park, where Westminster council said knocking two Regency homes into one was out of the question when there was already a shortage. However, permission has been granted for the Grade II-listed Prince’s Gate.

It sits right on the border with the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, the richest council in Britain, which is even more keen to welcome kings, queens, moguls, tyrants, tycoons, oligarchs and anyone with extreme wealth. The council even offers a discount on council tax if a mansion is a second (third, fourth or hundredth) home.

Yet this is also a place of extreme inequality. There are damp, overcrowded flats not far away, in which mothers and fathers go hungry in order to feed their children. The poverty gap is widening across Britain in a way that should be causing outrage at the start of the election campaign, and nowhere is it more visible than in this part of London.

The richest people living in this country now take a greater share of the total wealth than they did at the start of the century. The top 10 per cent of earners own 54 per cent of total assets, while the top 1 per cent have seen their incomes soar. Nothing demonstrates this better than a walk across Hyde Park from the most privileged neighbourhood in the capital to the poorest.

Prosperity and private healthcare mean that a man living in the lovely terraces around Prince’s Gate can expect to live to 91. Cross the road into Kensington and Chelsea, and the average wage is a staggering £101,000. That’s the median, allowing for extremes of wealth, while the mean is £36,000. But, a walk away to the north, lies Golborne, the most deprived ward in London, according to one measure. Here, the mean average wage is £18,500 and life expectancy for a man is just 72.

Among the Moroccan community, that figure drops to 63. “Their health is tragic,” says Emma Dent Coad, who represents Golborne on the council. “I am furious at the inequality here. There is no excuse. The council has reserves of £283m. We have the money to tackle inequality if we want to, but we just don’t want to.”

She talks of seeing parents go without food until they faint, so that their children can eat. She is seeing four-year-olds whose teeth drop out because of vitamin D deficiency. “They arrive at school tiny because they were malnourished in the womb, because the mother could not afford to eat properly. Some of the homes here are Dickensian. These people have nothing.”

Two-thirds of the children in Golborne live in overcrowded homes. Meanwhile, to the south, near the Royal Albert Hall, numbers 13, 14 and 15 Prince’s Gate stand empty. Eight US ambassadors lived here, which explains the Beaux Arts façade, so beloved in Washington, and the stone faces of Native Americans looking down from the window arches.

The three houses were bought for £36m in 2010 by Viridis Real Estate, the property division belonging to the Jameel family of Saudi Arabia (said to be worth £3.3bn). It was a smart move, as property prices here have soared by 65 per cent since then. Such deals are often about keeping money safe rather than finding a place to live.

The best examples of that can be seen as you walk to Golborne, through Hyde Park and past the armed guards on sentry duty at Kensington Palace, to the road that faces the home of the future king. Kensington Palace Gardens is known as Billionaire’s Row. The mansions are immaculate and supercars wait behind huge iron gates. Residents are said to include the steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal and the Sultan of Brunei, who controls a fortune worth £40bn.

According to Bloomberg, with a discount for second-home status, the Sultan paid £1,942 a year in council tax for his house here in 2012: just £32 a month more than the council tax paid by the Braithwaites, a pensioner couple living with their daughter and grandchildren in a rented home in Golborne.

Billionaire’s Row feels very distant, like a different country – but then you exit through the checkpoint and emerge in Notting Hill, once bohemian but now synonymous with gentrification and the films of Richard Curtis, made when this was Cool Britannia and we were promised that “things can only get better”.

That was certainly true for Tony Blair, who is now a multimillionaire. So is the architect of New Labour, Peter Mandelson, who famously said that he was “intensely relaxed about the filthy rich” as long as they paid their taxes. But the trouble with the new filthy rich in London is that they do not pay their taxes here, if at all.

“Trickle-down is a fallacy,” says Emma Dent Coad in a café beyond the Westway, on the edge of Golborne. “We have gone with that for how many years now? The property bubble started way before this government came to power. Property prices have gone through the roof, as these plutocrats have come from all over the world to live here, but our population is poorer.”

She accuses the Conservative council of spending money on making the streets look nice to attract wealthy incomers, rather than tackling the poverty hiding behind closed doors. “They have sanitised poverty. Disneyfied it. That is not regeneration, they are just displacing the community. It is deliberate.”

There are pockets of resistance. Many of the original tenants still live in Trellick Tower, which looms above Golborne. Designed by Modernist architect Erno Goldfinger, it is either a high-rise monstrosity or a modern marvel, depending on who you believe. “The people who live there love it because the building works,” says Dent Coad, who writes about architecture and planning as well as being a Labour councillor. “I was made in Chelsea. I know there is pride in this community. People may be poor but many of them keep their homes immaculate.”

Not every block of flats is as good as the Trellick; many are a disaster. “Come and look at the stairwell,” says Theresa, a 47-year-old woman I meet on the street. She takes me to a damp, dark and, frankly, nasty place. “Look. When it rains, the water comes through the ceiling, the paint is all blistered there. You walk under it, you get wet.”

The Sultan of Brunei, who controls a fortune worth £40bn, owns property on Billionaire’s Row in Kensington (Getty)

Her friend Frances, 57, says her neighbours are being moved early because black mould has invaded their flat. “Their children are all sick.” Both women have been waiting for years to be rehoused, which is why they don’t want their surnames to be used. “If you say anything against them, they won’t give you a flat.”

There is similar secrecy among the men standing outside a café on the street corner, waiting for Friday prayers. Mo wants to remain anonymous because he is frightened of losing his job as a night guard at a finance firm. I want to ask him something that has been on my mind a lot during today’s walk. Why are there not more riots? Why don’t the people who have nothing get angry and just go and grab something from the people who have too much? “I have thought about this,” he says warily. “The poor always go to jail. The rich people, never.”

Dent Coad is appalled to find that gentrification is creeping north. “There were Bentleys outside the new pub yesterday. What are they doing here?”

But the trouble with all this righteous anger from a Labour councillor is that some would say it was New Labour that got us into this mess, encouraging foreign billionaires to come here in the belief that that would lead to wider prosperity. Ed Miliband was a key part of an administration that unashamedly cosied up to the super-rich, which may be why he has failed to speak up clearly against inequality so far in this election campaign.

“I’m not New Labour and never have been,” Dent Coad says. “What motivates me, drives me to a fury, is social injustice. If something is wrong, we have to fight it.” Even if there is little chance of success, in a city seemingly besotted by super-wealth? “You’ve got to have a dream, mate.”

The poverty gap is wide and getting wider. Anyone who takes a walk can see that. The question now, as an election looms, is who dares to do something about it?

The Living Wage

Alexis plays football for a living. He has come a long way from the dust bowl in rural Chile where he grew up to the spectacular Emirates Stadium in London, where he plays for one of the world’s richest teams. He lives in a plush home, drives an expensive car and earns £180,000 a week.

Raja works for the same football club, Arsenal. He walks to the stadium on match days. He does the washing up, prepares food and drink and serves the fans, sometimes the players too. He does whatever his contractor tells him to do, and is paid by the hour, at the minimum legal rate of £6.50. That’s not enough for a man in his forties, as Raja is, to raise a family, even if he scrimps and saves. Not in London.

The Independent on Sunday 15 February 2015

Raja works for the same football club, Arsenal. He walks to the stadium on match days. He does the washing up, prepares food and drink and serves the fans, sometimes the players too. He does whatever his contractor tells him to do, and is paid by the hour, at the minimum legal rate of £6.50. That’s not enough for a man in his forties, as Raja is, to raise a family, even if he scrimps and saves. Not in London.

Sometimes Raja gets caught up in the excitement when Arsenal win and the season ticket holders – who pay a couple of grand a year – are bouncing up and down with joy. Sometimes he is delighted to serve Alexis Sanchez and his multimillionaire friends a drink to celebrate in the players’ lounge afterwards. But sometimes he looks at the astonishing wealth around him and wonders where his family’s next meal is coming from.

“It’s not fair,” says Martin Wroe, a friend of Raja who happens to be one of those season ticket holders. He walks to the stadium, too, from his home nearby. He is a supporter of the living wage campaign, which urges companies to pay their employees enough to live on. The experts say this constitutes £9.15 an hour in London and £7.85 outside the capital – and football fans across the country are now urging their teams to play fair.

So far, only Chelsea have signed up to pay the living wage, despite football having become rich beyond even its own opulent dreams. The Premier League has just sold the television rights for three seasons for more than £5bn.

The chief executive Richard Scudamore – who is thought to be on nearly £2m a year – told the Today programme on Wednesday that the league was not set up as a charity, and it was not the job of football clubs to raise the minimum wage. “That’s entirely for the politicians to do,” he said. “That’s not for us to do.”

But the tide may be turning this weekend. Yesterday, the co-owner of West Ham United, David Gold, announced on Twitter that all his employees, full and part time, would be on at least the living wage by June.

And the Premier League has told The Independent on Sunday that it again will meet campaigners, as some clubs look to follow suit. Arsenal are not believed to be among them, despite a remarkable campaign by Wroe and others.

Just before the FA Cup Final last year, Wroe wrote an emotional open letter on Raja’s behalf to the chief executive of Arsenal, a man called Ivan Gazidis, appealing to his sense of justice as a fellow Arsenal fan and a man whose parents fought courageously against apartheid in South Africa.

“Raja would need to work full time for a decade to earn what the mighty Mesut Ozil earns in a week,” wrote Wroe, referring to another of Arsenal’s highly paid superstars. “Now I love Mezut, there are days when I believe one of his passes proves the existence of God. And I’m guessing he’d help Raja himself if he bumped into him – but that would be charity and what Raja needs is justice,” he went on, before appealing directly to Gazidis himself. “That’s where you come in, just like your parents did when they faced down inequality and injustice all those years ago.”

Martin Wroe is an eloquent writer: he does it for a living. He is also an unpaid Anglican priest at a church near the stadium, so he is well aware of the jangle of inequality on those streets, with battered council flats hard up against gorgeous Georgian townhouses. He hand-delivered the letter to the Arsenal offices behind the stadium, and posted it online. The response was huge. It was shared by tens of thousands of fans from all kinds of clubs, and not only Arsenal, who feel the same way.

Andy Hull is a Labour member of the executive of Islington Council, which has put 98 per cent of its own staff and contractors on the living wage. “You’d have to work seven years without a break as a cleaner at the Emirates to earn what Ozil earns in a week. That is shameful, given the amount of money that is sloshing around in football,” he says. “It is about as grotesque an example as you can find of the inequality with which our society is riven.”

Inequality is a word none of our national politicians seems to want to say. And a lot of football supporters also have a bizarre blind spot when it comes to this. They will happily rage against fat-cat salaries and bankers’ bonuses, but rejoice when a new striker signs on an obscene wage, as Sanchez did for Arsenal last summer. One diehard Gooner who has a passion for social justice in the rest of his life told me: “I can’t afford to think about it or I would not be able to go and watch the team I love playing the sport I love. And anyway, what am I supposed to do?”

The Premier League often looks like a festival of greed, vanity and arrogance. Maybe he should walk away in disgust, as some have. Maybe he should buy one of those T-shirts from Philosophy Football that has a big red pound sign on the front and the words Against Modern Football. Or maybe he should demand more, as many Premier League fans do. They may feel unable on their own to resist the insane wages of the stars, but they can at least campaign to get fairer treatment for people like Raja, who serve them half-time pies and pints and clean the toilets.

The Living Wage Campaign was set up in 2001 by a group of east London parents who found themselves unable to make ends meet, despite doing two or three jobs. It has grown into a national movement, with figures calculated once a year by social policy experts at Loughborough University. This is not a party political issue: David Cameron, Boris Johnson and Nick Clegg are enthusiasts, as well as Ed Miliband.

Hundreds of firms across the country have now pledged to pay their people a living wage. Football has resisted so far, but a spokesman for the Premier League said on Friday that Manchester City and “several other clubs” were committed to paying the living wage to their direct employees, but they did not want to go public and be “used as campaign tools”.

The campaigners themselves are not satisfied. They say clubs should use their massive purchasing power to extend the living wage to contract workers like Raja too. The League itself already does that, said Dan Johnson, a spokesman. But he insisted it would be a mistake to think the organisation could tell its member clubs what to do.

Back at the stadium, the Arsenal Independent Supporters’ Association is preparing to hand out postcards calling for the club to back the living wage – ironically, at a game against the club from the ultimate tax haven, Monaco. Paul Matz, campaign organiser said: “We believe it is the right thing for Arsenal to do.”

Martin Wroe wrote another open letter at the start of the season. This time it was to Arsène Wenger, Arsenal’s manager, invoking his well-known thrift: “With your master’s degree in economics, you’ll appreciate that £6.50 an hour in London can leave you a little short.”

Again, there was a huge response online but none from the club. So this time he wrote to Sanchez, who grew up in poverty. “This is about the cleaners. The people you bump into most days at the Emirates or at training at London Colney. Maybe some days they remind you of the first cleaner you knew, your mother Martina, working all the hours God sent in your home town of Tocopilla in rural Chile.”

Martina washed fish and sold flowers, as well as cleaning, to feed the four children she was raising on her own. They all helped out. At the age of six, Alexis would do backflips for a few coins. Later he boxed on the street. At the age of 26, he still remembers. Like many Premier League players from poor backgrounds, Sanchez has a conscience and acts on it. Last winter he went back to Chile to pay for new football pitches for the children, so they don’t have to use rocks for goalposts as he did.

The letter was also posted in his native Spanish, but Sanchez did not reply. Arsenal said on Friday that it was trying to find the correspondence from Martin Wroe – the three letters delivered by hand. A spokesperson said: “Our employee remuneration packages exceed the requirement in the campaign. We work hard to ensure all our employees have a broad range of benefits as a result of their employment with us and they are among the most competitive in football. This will continue to be our approach.”

That’s not enough for those who want to see the club change. Sanchez will be there today, when Arsenal take on Middlesbrough. Raja will be in the stadium working hard behind the scenes and Wroe will be in his seat, waiting for an answer from Gazidis and Wenger.

He has hope. “This is how social change happens,” he says. “It is what we saw with the major banks. They all start off thinking, ‘No, we’re not doing this; it’s too complicated; it is inappropriate; this something for politicians to decide on, not us.’ But eventually they reflect on it and think, ‘Well, we may not agree but there is quite a lot of pressure outside, so let’s be pragmatic.’”

Football fans learn to be patient. Even Arsenal will have to yield eventually, he says. “At the point at which they are embarrassed, I imagine they will change their tune.”

Read the original report here

Tony Blair ignored six wise men who warned the invasion of Iraq would bring disaster. As we wait for Chilcot, they speak out again

tony_0020_headTony Blair had a cough. He looked sick, pale and exhausted. “Don’t tell me it is going to be bad,” he said to the six men he had summoned to see him in Downing Street as war loomed. “Tell me how bad it will be.” Read on

Scotland, please don’t go: a Yes vote would be profoundly undemocratic

Over the last few days I have heard a number of people on the Yes side in Scotland argue their case on the grounds of improving democracy. I find this ironic, to say the least. England believes in the union: most people, if they think about it at all, consider themselves British and want to stay that way. A Yes vote would take that away and change the constitution and nature of our nation – the one that is left – irrevocably, in profound ways, without our consent.

All those on the Yes side who argue that things have been happening to their nation without their consent because of decisions in remote Westminster have a very good point – and one that is shared by all who feel their vote has never counted. That needs to be addressed by a change in the voting system and greater devolution. The Labour Party had a chance to do that in 1997 but blew it. The Liberal Democrats campaigned hard for it but have lost their soul now. But if there is a Yes vote then we in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (including many Scots) will have had something huge, serious and permanent done to our nation without our consent, without our involvement in the debate at all, by a minority of the UK population.

Those arguing Yes for the sake of democracy seem to have forgotten that from this side of the border, as current partners in the kingdom, It’s a divorce that only one side wants. They seem to think this can happen without hard feelings. But as Niall Ferguson said on Newsnight last night, anyone who thinks that has never been divorced.