Who wants to bet G4S win the contract?
If you don’t know who G4S are, ask yourself why because they’re the largest employer in the world bar Walmart. But what do they do?
- Airport security. Three G4S security guards at Heathrow were responsible for the death of Angolan refugee Jimmy Mubenga in Oct 2010 when they kept him heavily restrained, despite his repeated complaints of not being able to breathe.
- Immigrant detention camps. In Australia, G4S were ‘faulted for lethal neglect and abuse of solitary confinement’ (NYTimes). Again in Australia, up to 50 asylum seekers went on hunger strike and sewed their own lips together in protest over conditions. G4S also ran these lovely detention boats in the Netherlands that were deemed ‘inhumane’ by the European Parliament.
- Guarding the entire length of the southwest US/Mexico border and deporting undocumented immigrants. Anyone starting to feel like G4S don’t like immigrants for some reason?
- Private UK police (already). G4S is already contracted to employ half of Lincolnshire police, and are building a police station there.
- Private prisons in the UK and US. Because why stop with immigrants?
- Juvenile detention centres. Because why stop with adults?
- Profiteering off the UK ‘Welfare to Work’ scheme. Which is essentially an ingenious device for taking tax-payer money away from those who need it, and giving it to G4S (who have the nerve to fob much of their workload off onto charities and other non-profit organisations). At the same time the scheme allows companies like Tesco to profit from slave labour as people are made to work full-time for their unemployment benefits.
- Military security in Afghanistan. Popular pastimes for the G4S employees guarding the US embassy in Kabul included: lighting fires, getting naked, pissing on each other and conducting humiliating hazings/initiations. NSFW photos here!
- Much more. Too much to list but it includes security for banks, ATM/cashpoint ‘management’, stewarding Live8 and Download and reading your gas meter. Also landmine clearance, which strangely enough is the only one of these things I’d happily trust them with.
Yeah see Jim this is much better articulated than my ‘what the fucking fuck’.
I think you have to also look at the ties between these sectors and question if the same corporation employing people to make arrests or detain people should have control of prisons, for example.
The JSA, for my non-British followers, is Job Seekers Allowance. You get this allowance if you’re not working. It’s unemployment benefit. Tesco is the UK version of Walmart. Walmart in the US is a supermarket that created in the US and then went global, with its own branch in the UK named Asda.
But that’s beside the point. Tesco put out an advert for work out on the internet specifically targeting these jobseekers. And its salary? None. You just got expenses. Just expenses; so you would have your transport paid for you. You work for less than minimum wage for the pittance the government gives you in your welfare payment.
Unsurprisingly, this advert went viral. A backlash took place on Twitter, but this behaviour has been taking place for a while. There’s a workfare programme designed by the right wing government that has been specifically designed to target the long term unemployed. It’s designed to commit them to accept the offer of a job (or more likely, work experience) and by default it provides financial incentive to employers. To the tune of around one thousand pounds. And if you refuse? You have your benefits cut in varying degrees.
Here’s what I don’t understand; but forcing people to work from an endless pool of around two million unemployed in the UK, what’s the incentive to offer full term work? They have slave labour, essentially.
While this storm goes on, it’s come out that around half a million long term sick and disabled people could be forced into unpaid work against their will under new plans proposed by the government. Charities and thinktanks have lambasted the government for this proposal, and understandably too; how ill does someone have to be to get welfare? Do you have to be dying? How many sick people will they force into labour when there are 300 people competing for every job in the United Kingdom? And at what human cost?
And then the debate starts. Or rather, it’s started. One between the undeserving poor; the dole scum, the Jeremy Kyle scum, the ones on benefits, the ones who haven’t worked in generations. On the other hand, the deserving poor; but most of them are undeserving. Throw them in the workhouse. Demonise the poor and minimalise welfare… Am I understanding this correctly; the government is paying huge corporations to employ people so that the people can work for this corporation for free?
supposedly participation in these schemes is voluntary, which i can attest to being a crock - ‘personal advisors’ have the discretion to cut you off for any bloody reason they can think of, and they certainly won’t be telling people they can refuse these schemes… they have their own quotas to worry about.
this was happening to me in late 2010, lord knows what it’s like now.
this was an interesting read, amongst other things it debunks some tory claims about the effectiveness of the schemes.
England =/= Britain
England =/= UK
'British accent' =/= BBC newsreader
also please stop obsessing over the monarchy. thanks.
Those Who Wait by Daley
Album: Those Who Wait
It’s usual practice when someone is killed that their personal details are not made public until the next of kin has been informed. Mark Duggan’s family saw in headlines that he had been killed as a result of a “terrifying shoot-out”. Why such a difference in treatment? I was one of those who went to Tottenham police station on Saturday, with members of his family, to get an official acknowledgement that Mark had been killed. No official confirmation had been given to the family. As a community we were outraged they were being treated with such disregard by both the Met and the IPCC.
Why, 10 years after the Macpherson inquiry reported on institutional racism in the Met, should it still occur? We are from Tottenham: we have seen Cynthia Jarrett, Joy Gardner and Roger Sylvester killed by the police and do not expect finite answers from an investigation that has barely begun. All we really wanted was an explanation of what was going on. We needed to hear directly from the police. We waited for hours outside the station for a senior officer to speak with the family, in a demonstration led by young women. A woman-only delegation went into the station, as we wanted to ensure that this did not become confrontational. It was when the young women, many with children, decided to call it a day that the atmosphere changed, and guys in the crowd started to voice and then act out their frustrations.
Bolded because that’s completely true and I don’t dispute it at all. I think that people trying to paint this as a focused political statement or romanticise it are misguided. I also think that the fact the rioters are destroying their own communities in the process is a sign that this isn’t anger focused against any one target in particular.
The riots aren’t just in London, they are breaking out all across the country, including in my town. I’m getting pissed off with non-UK people assigning a specific political ideology with people setting fire to cars in residential neighbourhoods and hospitals, to local shops run by their neighbours, to houses etc.
Yeah ofcourse it isn’t a focused or a specific political ideology - not at all. These riots are about the disenfranchised youth who feel that they have no stake in society (and nothing to lose), that they can do what they want, and the police cannot stop them - all about power and catharsis. But the politics are in there somewhere. A non-violent orotest over the death of a man by the police, in a community where locals have been given every reason to mistrust the people behind law and order, is one kind of a political statement. Raiding shops for technology and clothes that cost ten times as much as the benefits you’re no longer entitled to is another. A co-ordinated, viral wave of civil unrest across the poorest boroughs of Britain, with young people coming from across the capital and the country to battle the police, is another. The people running Britain had absolutely no clue how desperate things had become. They thought that after decades of rising inequality, they could (that too, during recession) take away the last little things that gave people hope, the benefits, the jobs, the possibility of higher education, the support structures, and nothing would happen. And now the country is on fire
^^ Actually a pretty perfect summary. The point of my original post wasn’t to dispute that there are real social and political reasons for why this has happened, or that they shouldn’t be examined. I think you can realise exactly what you wrote above, and yet also refuse to laud the destruction of local businesses and homes, violence etc as a good thing. The two aren’t mutually exclusive. [and also to state that this isn’t a focused political protest but an explosion of anger]