Youth activism, cross-border feminism and climate justice

My latest offerings from the New Internationalist website…

Podcast: Jody McIntyre on youth activism – As part of the lead up to October’s youth issue I made a podcast featuring an interview with guest-editor Jody McIntyre.

‘We were wrong to think the environment could wait’ – Interview with Lidy Nacpil, the inspiring Filipino economic and climate justice campaigner who started out as a student activist against the Marcos regime.

The dos and don’ts of cross border feminism – Last weekend I went to UK Feminista’s Summer School for a day and caught this session on building global solidarity.

Right, I’m off for a little holiday to Gent, Belgium now. Looking forward to catching up on some reading on the bus journey – am finally going to get through Paul Mason’s Why It’s Kicking Off Everywhere – better late than never!

New Internationalist podcast

Finally posting about the podcasts I’ve started making at New Internationalist.

The first one, for the September issue of New Internationalist, is on the legalization of drugs. In it I speak to Vanessa Baird, NI co-editor about why she thinks the war on drugs isn’t working.

You can listen to the podcast here. Read more about September’s New Internationalist here.

Today I spoke to Jody McIntyre for October’s episode on youth activism. Here’s a video taster for October’s issue – Youth rising: why apathy is not an option.

Giving A-toss about disability

This article first appeared on the New Internationalist website.

As the end of the London Paralympic Games draws closer, the legacy of the event for the disabled community is on the agenda. Will the inspiration and excitement have a lasting positive outcome for people with disabilities in Britain?

Many campaigners are unconvinced. They are also angry at the Games’ sponsorship by Atos. The company is deeply unpopular for its Work Capability Assessments (WCAs), which help the Department for Work and Pensions decide who receives health and disability related benefits and who is ‘fit for work.’

The tests have come in for a huge amount of criticism for being inaccurate and unfair as the government tries to cut the cost of the welfare bill, leaving many without the support they depend on.

When Atos’ sponsorship of the Paralympics was announced, it caused an outcry. Many found it offensive that the organization was going to be so closely associated with an event celebrating the best of disabled sport.

Last week saw the climax to a week of action by activists intent on ramming home the message that the French company don’t #giveatoss about disabled people. On Friday 31 August Disabled People Against the Cuts (DPAC) and UK Uncut teamed up outside Atos’ UK headquarters for a ‘Closing Atos Ceremony’.

Protesters also blockaded and occupied the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). As police broke up the demonstration outside, DPAC reported one arrest, several injuries to protesters and damage to one woman’s wheelchair.

In a poignant twist, Friday’s protest also coincided with the death from cancer of 51-year-old Cecilia Burns from Northern Ireland – just six months after DWP found her ‘fit to work’ following an Atos assessment.

Earlier in the week DPAC staged a vigil outside Atos, delivering a coffin to remember others who had died, including people who committed suicide after receiving their assessment results.

Elsewhere, actions included a mass ‘die-in’ in Cardiff’s city centre, which blocked a major road, as well as a blockade in Manchester outside an Atos office.

Paralympians themselves have voiced their concern about Atos. Former swimmer and seven-time medal winner Tara Flood played a role in the ‘Atos Games’ as part of a spoof ceremony where she had a medal awarded then taken away after an Atos assessment.

During the opening ceremony of the Paralympics it was thought Team GB were hiding their Atos-branded lanyards in an act of protest. However, team officials later denied this.

The Paralympics and whether they benefit the struggles of disabled people has become a thorny issue. Activists have been accused of drawing attention away from the games and the achievements of the athletes…

Read the rest of this blog here at the New Internationalist website.

Squatting myths

This weekend a law criminalising squatting in residential buildings in England and Wales came into force, leaving up to 20,000 people facing eviction, fines or imprisonment.

Similarly to protesters, squatters are a often stereotyped and misrepresented in some of of mainstream press as freeloaders, anti-social, a nuisance to the community. Unlike any squatter I have ever met.

Sure, just because I haven’t met squatters fitting that description it doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Squatters are like any group of people, not a homogenised mass. They make use of empty buildings, making them home and sometimes a community space as well.

Squatters utilise all sorts of buildings but these laws only apply to residential ones. It is estimated there are 350,000 long term empty homes in the UK, 279,000 in England. These are the buildings people would have been able to squat.

As the squatting law has been discussed in the press over the last few days the same old inaccurate moans have come out, as well as some great reporting. Here are some of the squatting myths that get to me the most:

Squatters don’t pay their way

Sure, squatters are not paying rent or a mortgage but they are subject to the same tax laws as everyone else, including council tax. While some may not pay, that makes them no different to non-squatters.

Often buildings are empty because they are not of good enough standard to rent. If people decide to squat them this often means connecting up energy supplies and fixing things round the house, things which often cost money and a lot of time.

This law was needed so landlords could get rid of squatters

Buildings must be empty for people to squat them. They must not break in or cause criminal damage. They can not squat people’s homes. There were already laws in place to deal with all of those things.

Even if they’ve entered through an open window and caused no damage to a building that has been empty for years they can still be evicted. What was known as ‘squatters rights’ didn’t mean squatters could just take any building they want.

Squatters are lazy

It’s the age old criticism thrown at anyone vaguely ‘alternative.’ While the rest of us are working hard, paying our way how come these people have the time, and cheek to protest/occupy/squat/actively try and change or do anything positive?

Many squatters have jobs, many don’t (seemingly the yardstick of ‘laziness’ used by people in these arguments). Living in a squat is itself almost a full time job and most keep residents there 24/7.

A lazy squat just wouldn’t work.

For more information on the law and squatting in general go to the Advisory Service for Squatters.
The law is being challenged in court by Irene Gardiner in Wales, find out more here.