When lockdown is over the government should bring back Eat Out to Help Out

Throughout August 2020 the Eat Out to Help Out scheme, with a total cost of £849 million to the British taxpayer, was rolled out across the United Kingdom. The policy made eating out at restaurants more affordable by ensuring a 50% discount, up to £10, for all customers from Monday to Wednesday. 

While research by the University of Warwick has suggested that the policy drove COVID-19 infections up by between 8 and 17%, the scheme made eating out considerably more affordable for many. During Eat Out to Help Out, a Big Mac meal cost £2.30, a double lamb burger with fries and a drink cost £5 at Nanrose Peri Peri 2 Grill in London and a Michelin starred meal could cost £12.

The scheme was well received by consumers who gained both nutritional advantages and social benefits at an affordable price. Eat Out to Help Out also helped save many small eateries that were put at financial risk by the coronavirus pandemic by encouraging people to eat out. The economy was given a kickstart and many jobs were saved. The scheme also received support from the Federation of Small Businesses who proposed that the policy be extended further.

There is historical precedent for subsidising food. From 1940 to 1947 the Ministry of Food established around 2,000 restaurants that provided meals that would cost £1 in today’s money. Publicly owned pubs provided subsidised food to support Britons following World War Two and ensured anybody in the country was able to have a hot meal for an affordable price.

However, the approximately £849 million per month spent on Eat Out to Help Out could be spent elsewhere. Journalist Grace Blakeley has argued that the subsidy was put in place to help big businesses and was designed to bolster Rishi Sunak’s future leadership campaign.

While the absorption of the money could be countered by increasing corporation tax on large businesses and cutting off tax loopholes, many large corporations received a large proportion of the £849 million subsidy in August 2020. 

Many other policies could be introduced to help tackle the issue of food poverty in Britain at a lower cost to the taxpayer than Eat Out to Help Out. While government subsidised restaurant meals were positive to the consumer, there has been little to no support given to people on low incomes during the pandemic.

Labour for Universal Basic Services has proposed a £4 billion plan to provide one-third of meals to the roughly 2 million households in Britain that face food insecurity every year. This policy, alongside free school meals and meals on wheels for the elderly and disabled, would distribute 1.8 billion meals for free to some of the most vulnerable people in society. This National Food Service would form part of a wider Universal Basic Services programme, rendering food, transport, broadband and millions of homes free at the point of use for the wider public. This could be implemented alongside the reintroduction of restaurants modelled in the style of those run by the Ministry of Food from 1940 to 1947. Furthermore, all workers could receive a living wage alongside an introduction of a 4-day working week to boost wages, reduce food poverty and improve productivity.

Eat Out to Help Out may not solve every social issue in Britain but the policy helped protect restaurants, saved many jobs and gave millions of people the opportunity to pay for meals at an affordable price during a global pandemic. Eat Out to Help Out considerably benefited our society and should be reintroduced alongside a wider programme to tackle food poverty across Britain.

Free Leonard Peltier!

45 years ago, on the 6th February 1976 an indigenous activist, and member of the Turtle Mountain Chippewa Indians, by the name of Leonard Peltier was arrested in Canada in connection to the shooting of two FBI agents on Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, USA, in 1975. Peltier was convicted of aiding and abetting the murder and has been imprisoned since 1977 serving two life sentences. The trial was strewn with inaccuracies, mistrials of justice and downright discrimination, yet Peltier remains behind bars to this day. 

Before we get into the case it is important to give some background on the anti-indigenous atmosphere that has presided in the US since the first colonisers landed in 1607. Indigenous people have suffered a complete erasure of their culture and way of life through government policies designed to have that very effect. From the early days of ‘Manifest Destiny’ indigenous people have been slaughtered and their land has been stolen. Buffalo, an incredibly important animal which formed a lot of the basis for the indigenous people and their nomadic lifestyle, were massacred in huge numbers (three million were culled in 1872 alone). First Nations, who did not believe in the ownership of land, were pushed onto underfunded reservations which were then gradually stolen from them by white settlers. Indigenous customs and traditions have been made illegal and the US Government has forced policies intent on ‘Americanising’ and integrating First Nations into the ‘civilised’ capitalist society created by, and for, rich Caucasian men. Today, indigenous people make up only 2.4% of the US population, with over a quarter living in poverty. Issues of unemployment, alcoholism and drug abuse also disproportionately affect indigenous people.

In 1968, taking inspiration from the African American Civil Rights movement reaching its peak in the early 1960’s and the rise of the Black Panther Party during this time, the American Indian Movement (AIM) was set up to address systematic issues of poverty and police brutality against indigenous tribes. Leonard Peltier was an active member of this campaign group when two men (who, at the time, did not identify themselves as FBI Agents) invaded Pine Ridge Reservation in 1975. 

Peltier’s trial took a little over two weeks and the all-white jury took 11 hours to deliver a guilty verdict. It was later revealed, though, that throughout the trial the FBI had coerced and intimidated key witnesses and Peltier’s constitutional right to a fair trial had been violated. The case mainly relied on Myrtle Poor Bear as a key witness as she was Peltier’s girlfriend and witnessed the shooting – except it was later revealed she was not present at the time of the shooting, moreover she had never known Leonard personally. Several key witnesses have since recanted their stories, claiming they were made under intimidation tactics carried out by the FBI. During his trial the FBI spread fearmongering rumours of possible ’terrorist’ attacks to be carried out by AIM, thus building tension in an already anti-indigenous atmosphere. In terms of physical evidence: FBI ballistic expert, Evan Hodge, stated he was unable to perform a test on the supposed murder weapon. It was later found out that a firing pin test was indeed carried out on the supposed murder weapon, and the results were negative. The bullets which killed the agents did not come from Peltier’s gun. The jury, of course, were never made aware of this evidence during the trial. There was no forensic evidence to support the prosecution. There was no reliable witness testimony that either: placed Peltier at the scene previous to the shooting or identified him as the person who shot the two FBI agents. There is no reasonable evidence that Leonard Peltier was responsible for the murder of FBI Agents Williams and Coler. 

Despite the massive amount of evidence of FBI misconduct, blatant disregard for Peltier’s constitutional rights, and obvious grounds for a mistrial; Leonard Peltier has been imprisoned for the past 45 years. At the time of his imprisonment, in 1977, the average sentence served for homicide before being released on parole was 8 years – Peltier has, to this date, served over five times that amount. The US Government even extended his term, in direct violation of the 1984 Sentencing Reform Act. Furthermore, he has been denied clemency by, everybody’s favourite war criminals, George W. Bush and Barack Obama in 2009 and 2017 respectively. The next scheduled parole hearing is in 2024, by which time Peltier will be 79. 

Unless action is taken soon, it is highly likely that Leonard Peltier will die in prison, for a crime he was wrongfully convicted of. His only crime was belonging to a race of people which the US Government has sought to rid themselves of by any means necessary. The treatment of First Nations in the US has been the longest continual massacre in its history, yet it receives very little attention. When I studied ‘Native American Civil Rights’ for A-Level History, Peltier was never even mentioned by name – it simply stated that two FBI Agents had been shot on a reservation, before swiftly moving on. The fact that Peltier is still imprisoned shows clearly that the situation in the US is not improving. Racism, injustice, discrimination and persecution against non-whites is still incredibly prevalent and indigenous tribes are yet to face any real reparations for the complete destruction and systematic dismantling of their entire way of life. Leonard Peltier has been imprisoned for 45 years for daring to campaign against systematic poverty and the persecution of his people, that does not give the impression of the free and fair society the US likes to present itself as. Free Leonard Peltier.

To find out more on the case, and find out how you can help, please visit: www.whoisleonardpeltier.info

If Britain can’t handle Diversity’s Britain’s Got Talent performance, how will we ever truly embrace racial diversity?

Over the past few weeks, there has been a lot of talk in the media surrounding the nation’s response to Diversity’s performance on ITV’s Britain’s Got Talent. On Saturday 5th September, Diversity, a successful street dance group consisting of dancers from a range of racial backgrounds, delivered a powerful dance performance which touched on the events of this year. It highlighted how the global coronavirus pandemic brought the world to a standstill, giving room for the tragic death of George Floyd and those of many other black victims of racial violence to be afforded worldwide attention. The performance stood in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement, echoing the cries for racial equality that have been voiced by the black diaspora all over the world in the past six months.

To my surprise, but not so surprisingly or out-of-character after all, the British public managed to find offence in what was a moving and unifying performance, claiming that Britain’s Got Talent should be a space for entertainment, not political statements. What these critics fail to understand is that blackness is political. In fact, the public outcry that followed Diversity’s performance, evidenced by the 24,500 complaints it received in just over a week, begs the question: will Britain even truly embrace racial diversity? Or, are most Brits so uncomfortable opening up a dialogue about race in their country that race relations in Britain have reached their peak level of progress – a weird grey area between love and hate, a position of mere tolerance on all things black?

Don’t get me wrong. British citizens aren’t completely averse to admitting that racism exists in the world today. What they are opposed to, however, is admitting the state of race relations in Britain today. Great Britain, with its claim to be such a ‘great’ and mighty island, has developed a national worldview which encourages the country to worship and revere itself, whilst criticising others. 

What exactly does this mean? It means that Brits waste no time when it comes to pointing out how explicit and glaring racism in the US or France is, yet would deny the severity of it in their very own territory. It means that, if I as a Black British individual even attempt to voice the cold, harsh reality of racism in Britain amidst White British people, I will be met with rhetoric which invalidates and dismisses my experience. They’d claim a facade of tolerance and racial harmony in Britain with a series of statements like: “Britain is one of the least racist and most tolerant countries in Europe”, “Racism isn’t really much of an issue in Britain anymore” or “We all get along so well in this country. Stop causing a divide,” and finally, my personal favourite: “Stop playing the race card. It probably had nothing to do with you being black.” 

Of course, none of these dismissive statements should anger people of colour, right? Because that’s the ‘British way’, right? Sweeping things under the carpet with the hope that if you ignore them for long enough, they will cease to be a problem. This may seem like a great solution, but the only issue with this is that it only works for White British people, not for people of colour in Britain. By pretending that racism isn’t a British issue, but a foreign, international one, the country does no favours to minority Brits – particularly Black Brits, who, time and time again, bear the brunt of the insidious and deep-rooted racism in this country. In fact, it worsens our experience, making us feel gaslighted and delusional. It’s one thing to experience discrimination, and another to constantly be told that you’re not experiencing discrimination.

The tendency of the British to gaslight its Black British inhabitants is not specific to Diversity. We saw this same attitude manifest itself earlier this year when many Brits attacked Stormzy for voicing that he thought Britain is “100%” racist in an interview with an Italian newspaper, La Repubblica. Despite most news outlets stepping forward to clarify that Stormzy meant that the UK is certainly and most definitely racist, thousands of ignorant individuals decided to run with their presumptions that he was identifying all British people as racist. Ironically, in an attempt to challenge what seemed to them to be a false generalisation, many Brits proved Stormy right by spewing further racist slurs, stating that he – a British native – should “go back to Ghana” if he is unhappy with the status quo in the UK. 

Not long after this incident, we also saw the same thing occur when thousands of Brits called the Brits Award Show to complain when Dave performed ‘Black’ at the 2020 Brits’ Awards. Once again, Britain revealed to 3.8% of its population that it possesses the uniquely fascinating ability to find ‘offence’ in any performance that sheds light on their black experience. Many began spitefully bringing up the fact that one of Dave’s brothers is serving a life sentence in prison for murder, arguing that he should focus on the kind of “black on black violence” perpetrated by his brothers before accusing Britain of racism, as though the two issues are mutually exclusive. Because surely, a black man with two brothers in prison has no business discussing racism until he single-handedly solves the issue of knife crime in London… because black people shouldn’t dare to speak about racism until the black community is violence-free and harmonious. 

This form of respectability politics has been used to silence the black diaspora for centuries. We have always been warned that we must first prove that we are capable of civilisation and humanity before we are treated like civilised human beings. God forbid that we are entitled to decent human treatment, on the sole basis of us being human. No. First, we must come across as respectable and decent. We must earn our spaces on platforms like Britain’s Got Talent and the Brits Awards… and if we dare speak about taboo topics such as racism in our own country, we should immediately be banned from these platforms, and our voice must be taken away, in the same way it was ‘given’ to us by our benevolent white puppet masters. 

This explains why many White British people respond to pro-black, anti-racist performances with a sense of entitlement and ownership towards British media platforms, demanding that platforms like ITV and the Brits ban black performers for simply speaking their mind. According to them, they have the power to simply shut us up when they feel uncomfortable since they kindly ‘allowed’ us to speak in the first place. Yet, when they can’t bear to hear our reality, they’d rather resort to silencing our voices completely, cutting off any opportunity to initiate the dialogue about racism in the UK. 

This sends a message to all of us Black Brits: it tells us that in the UK, we can only speak when what we are saying allows White Brits to sit comfortably in their cosy seats of white privilege. If Britain can’t deal with the harsh truths of British racism, at least enough to silently sit through a harmless Diversity performance, how will we ever be able to embrace racial diversity?


“When White People Are Uncomfortable, Black People Are Silenced”

– Elizabeth Cargle, 2019

The politics of Misogynoir: One of the many barriers which silence and erase black women in the public sphere

The abuse and hate hurled at black and dark-skinned women who dare to take a seat at the table and speak truth to power is tragically nothing new in politics. However, in the age of social media, twitter trolls and memes, this abuse plays out brutally in our digital spaces and manifests itself in the “real world”.

This form of misogyny has become so acute, that in 2008 the term misogynoir was coined by the academic Moya Bailey to give black women the vocabulary to talk about their experiences.  As researcher Lisa Amanda Palmer highlights, the term describes the gendered and sexualised form of racism faced by black women in popular culture and the current political landscape. However, misogynoir rears its head in all aspects of black women’s lives, having devastatingly tangible and violent consequences.

One extreme example of this was an incident that took place at end of August. A right-wing French magazine published a cartoon depicting a black member of parliament and outspoken afro-feminist activist Danièle Obono, as a slave in chains. This image was accompanied by an equally racist fictional narrative where she finds herself put up for auction in the 18th century. After seeing the images, I was left dumbfounded, asking myself how a magazine, which the French president once described as “very good” could publish an image of a black member of parliament, a human being, as a slave? Worst still, Obono is frequently met with an avalanche of abuse from her fellow politicians and members of the public alike for simply doing her job.

This is by no means a problem unique to the French. Misogynoir is rampant and deep-rooted within the UK political landscape too. This summer alone, I was distressed to read that the Labour MP and former Shadow Women’s and Equalities Minister Dawn Butler was forced to close her constituency office. This was after threats against her and her staff  “drastically escalated” following her defence of  Black Lives Matter protests and after speaking about the impact of COVID-19 on ethnic minorities.  Not only was this an attack on Dawn Butler, but an attack on democracy itself. In an open letter to her constituency, Butler frankly stated that the windows of her office had been smashed through by bricks and that she continues to:  “receive on an almost daily basis, threats of violence and death threats”.  Though, she went on to add defiantly that: “I will never be threatened into silence and will continue to speak out and speak up for all of my constituents in Brent Central”.

The labour antisemitism report leaked in April also painted a dark and depressing image of the endemic nature of anti-black racism and misogynoir within the labour party and politics more generally. For years I saw Labour as leading the fight against racism within mainstream politics, but no longer feel that way today. Racism and misogyny are not just confined to the ultra-right or the depths of twitter troll land but are present on all sides of the political spectrum. The dossier confirmed that; unearthing the vile treatment and bullying that black women were subject to by members of their own party.  Upon her appointment to the shadow cabinet, senior staff jokingly dismissed Dawn Butler’s serious allegations of racism as “untrue”. Similarly, the leaked document revealed how a senior staff member used  “a classic racist trope” to insult Diane Abbott; the first black woman to be elected to parliament and longest-serving black MP. Despite her popularity within her constituency, retaining her seat for over 30 years, a 2017 report revealed that Abbot receives more online abuse than any other MP. 

Perhaps, what these blatant attacks on a black woman painfully shows is just how commonplace the dehumanisation of black women has become.  These attacks usually rely upon racist and sexist tropes that portray black women as angry, undesirable, animalistic and ultimately undeserving of their humanity or your empathy. Despite attempts to silence these phenomenal women, they still continue to fight and stand up for what they believe in. They refuse to be invisible and refuse to be silent. In the words of Dianne Abbott: “the abuse and the attacks have never made me falter”. Yet the heavy burden of misogynoir should not be left upon the shoulders of black women to carry alone. We must struggle, collectively to rid it from our body politic. While I don’t have all the answers, what I do know is that we have to go beyond “diversity and inclusion” or unconscious bias training to achieve this. This can be summed up by author Lucy Ko’s tweet: “The revolution will not be diversity and inclusion trainings”. The presence of black women and other marginalised communities in parliament is vital to keeping our democracy alive and we must remove the barriers that stop them from getting there.