Joanne Thomas – the general secretary of the shopworkers’ union Usdaw has made a blistering condemnation of the far-right’s narrative that their anti-migrant agitations are done in order to defend or protect women and girls.

Thomas made the intervention in a debate at the annual Trades Union Congress (TUC) taking place this week in Brighton.

Thomas told the Congress: “The far right have never shown any interest in campaigning to end violence against women and girls before, but they’ve hijacked and weaponised this issue to promote their violently racist and anti-migrant agendas.

“Far from seeking to protect women and girls, the far-right hold and promote extremely sexist notions of family, advocating a return to traditional values, pushing women back into the home and giving men absolute authority over women’s bodies and the family.”

Thomas went on to say: “We were horrified at the racist attacks on the hotels housing migrants and refugees that we saw last summer – and of course, much more recently the so-called port protests in Dover and Portsmouth where roads were blocked by masked men dressed in black.

“These incidents make extremely clear the very real threat the far right pose to people and of course women’s lives. And as one woman bystander in Dover recalled, there were no banner, there was no slogans, just pure intimidation. And it was a demonstration only in the sense that they wanted to demonstrate their power to intimidate.”

Later in her speech, the Usdaw general secretary summed up the absurdity of far-right activists’ claims that their activities are designed to ‘protect’ women and girls. She told delegates: “The far-right promote that racist lie that sexual violence is something that has been imported to these shores by foreigners. We know that that is glossing over the uncomfortable truth that violence against women and girls is committed overwhelmingly by men who were known to them.

“We also know – as it’s previously been said – that two out of every five people arrested for disorder last summer had police histories of violence against women. Two out of every five. And those offences ranging from stalking to battery to sexual assault and coercive control. These men are not protectors of women and girls, many of them are the perpetrators of violence.”

Thomas concluded her speech by saying: “Congress, we stand shoulder to shoulder in solidarity with all women and girls, wherever they are, whatever their circumstances”, before adding: “I genuinely believe that the Labour government has the will and the tools to materially improve women’s lives. This must remain their focus, and the Labour government must show leadership in responding to the weaponisation of gender based violence. They must not allow it to be distorted by misinformation and for us to be dragged further to the right on the political spectrum. All women and girls deserve to live lives free from violence and abuse.”

Thomas’ speech came during in a debate on a motion titled ‘Tackling the far right and the weaponisation of women’s and girls’ safety’. The motion – which passed unanimously – was brought forward by the TUC Women’s Conference.

That motion read: “We express deep concern over the growing trend of blaming migrants for rape and sexual attacks in the UK. Such narratives are often fuelled by misinformation, political opportunism and sensationalist reporting, which distort evidence and contribute to fear, division, racism and xenophobia. Sexual violence is a serious societal issue that affects people across all backgrounds, and addressing it requires a focus on the behaviour of perpetrators, not the nationality of communities.”

Alongside this, the motion heavily criticised Reform UK’s policies and its spokespeople’s comments on women’s rights. It read: “Conference notes Nigel Farage and Reform UK representatives frequently link the perceived threat to women and girl’s safety to illegal immigration, however Conference disputes that, believing that the greater danger is Reform themselves.

“Reform’s manifesto pledges to scrap The Equality Act 2010 removing legal foundations that protect women from discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace. Reform MPs have voted against Bills that would tackle stalking and want to see the Online Safety Bill repealed.

“Nigel Farage has called abortion time limits “utterly ludicrous” and appointed Professor James Orr, who opposes abortion in all circumstances, as a senior advisor. He has weaponised the trauma of survivors of grooming gangs and has called Andrew Tate “an important voice for men”.”

The motion went on to commit the trade union movement to – among other things – “build alliances with feminist and anti-racist movements”, “highlight the positive contributions of migrant and refugee women”, “highlight the harm caused to women by anti-immigration and racist rhetoric”, and support a “national strategy to counter misinformation, racist and xenophobic narratives around crime”.

Chris Jarvis is head of strategy and development at Left Foot Forward

The post Union leader destroys far-right’s claims to care about women’s safety appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

Trade unionists are gathering in Brighton this week for the annual Trades Union Congress (TUC).

Today (13 September), delegates debated a number of motions on how the trade union movement should respond to the rise of the far-right.

As part of this, delegates agreed to a motion which will see the TUC support trade union members to take on far-right narratives in digital spaces.

The motion read: “There is a growing rise in far-right parties using social media to influence supporters”, and argued that the trade union movement should be “engaging with those audiences by addressing cultural concerns rather than relying on ideological labels.”

The motion went on to say: “Far right groups have tapped into cultural grievances and economic anxieties, gaining traction across much of the Western world through algorithmic reach and large volumes of authentic short form content. In contrast, official union and left of centre channels struggle to match the scale and speed of this output.”

By passing the motion, the TUC has committed to: “educate activists in effective, respectful online engagement that focuses on cultural issues and avoids alienating labels” and “establish a social media task force to support activists, helping them use digital tools confidently and stay consistent in messaging”.

The motion was proposed by the TUC Black Workers Conference.

Chris Jarvis is head of strategy and development at Left Foot Forward

The post TUC agrees to launch social media taskforce to take on far-right online appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) has pledged to remove disabled and refugee children from mainstream schools in Saxony-Anhalt if it wins the state election on September 6, prompting warnings that its education policy would institutionalise discrimination and deepen social division.

The AfD’s election manifesto declares that the “inclusion experiment has failed and must be ended” and proposes a fundamental overhaul of the state’s education system. Among its plans is an expansion of special schools for children with disabilities, effectively reversing Germany’s move towards educating children with and without disabilities together.

The proposal goes further by seeking to place refugee children in separate educational settings. The party says this would “reinforce the message that their stay in Germany is only temporary.”

Rather than treating education as a means of integration and equal opportunity, the policy frames refugee children primarily through their immigration status. Critics argue that separating children on the basis of whether they are refugees, risks turning schools into instruments of exclusion rather than places where children can participate equally in society.

The AfD also wants to prevent Islamic education from being offered in schools, arguing that “Islam is not part of Germany” and that providing such education would be “virtually impossible” at a reasonable cost.

The proposals have drawn criticism from political opponents, who warn that the party’s approach would create a two-tier education system.

Conrad Clemens, Saxony’s minister of education, told local media: “The idea of putting foreigners and students with disabilities in separate classes leads to a dangerous division in the classroom. Such ideas are unacceptable for our education system.”

The AfD’s education proposals form part of a wider programme that seeks to challenge Germany’s approach to immigration and its relationship with Russia. The party has called for greater provision of Russian language teaching and the reinstatement of school exchanges with Russia, arguing that current policies towards Russia are “not in Germany’s interests.”

The proposals are particularly contentious given the AfD’s political standing in Saxony-Anhalt.

Ulrich Siegmund, the party’s leading candidate in the state, is regarded as one of its more hardline figures. The state’s chapter of the AfD has been classified as “right-wing extremist” by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency.

The agency has raised concerns about the party’s understanding of citizenship and its emphasis on ethnic identity, arguing that elements of the AfD’s political programme are incompatible with Germany’s constitutional principles.

Opponents have also warned about the potential consequences of an AfD-led state government for public institutions and national security. Concerns have included the handling of sensitive and classified information if the party were to gain control of government departments.

Germany has spent decades developing an education system intended to accommodate children with different needs and backgrounds. The AfD’s proposals would represent a move in the opposite direction, replacing integration with separation.

That has also raised the prospect of legal challenges if the party enters government and attempts to implement the measures. Any such programme would have to contend with Germany’s constitutional protections, including principles of equality and human dignity.

Recent polling has put the AfD in a strong position ahead of the September 6 election, raising the prospect that proposals once confined to the political fringe could become government policy.

The post AfD’s plan to segregate disabled and refugee children sparks backlash in Germany appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

Ryan Bridge, founder of Operation Raise the Colours, the online campaign to display national flags in public spaces, has reacted furiously after the High Court backed Oxfordshire County Council’s decision to stop people attaching flags to roadside lampposts.

Oxfordshire County Council recently secured a High Court injunction preventing people from fastening flags to lampposts across the county. The Liberal Democrat-led authority argued that the practice created road safety hazards while also amounting to trespass and obstruction. Breaching the injunction could result in the seizure of assets, unlimited fines or even imprisonment.

The ruling follows a sustained campaign of intimidation directed at council staff. During proceedings, the judge heard that employees had been advised to check their vehicles for tracking devices after harassment linked to the dispute, while one worker’s home address was published online. Three individuals associated with Operation Raise the Colours were also warned by the court not to engage in any future flag-related activity.

Oxfordshire County Council has made clear that it continues to fly both the Union Flag and the St George’s Cross at County Hall and fully supports residents displaying flags on their own property. The case was about unauthorised installations on public infrastructure, not banning national flags.

That distinction, however, was largely absent from the predictable outrage that followed.

The Express declared that a ‘woke’ council had ‘banned’ St George’s and Union flags, despite the court ruling being about where they could be displayed rather than whether they could be flown at all. To reinforce that framing, the newspaper turned to the founder of Operation Raise the Colours.

Bridge told the Express: “This is the country we’re living in. This is the woke, middle-class, liberal, left agenda and, in places like Oxford, Cambridge, and Brighton, which are heavily occupied by people from the university education sector, we feel that our children are being indoctrinated by the left wing. This is where it’s happening.

“These people are getting rules and regulations for their own little world.”

His comments quickly moved beyond flags altogether.

Asked whether he believed Andy Burnham was patriotic, whether he could see the new Prime Minister hoisting a flag himself. Bridge said:

“I do, but I think he would do it for purposes of trying to get people onboard, just like he says ‘I’m one of the people, I’ll speak to the people’ and all this malarkey.

“I think it’s all one big cover. I am disgusted that he has got a Number 10 of the north. I think that’s disgusting.”

He went on to claim that Britain’s traditions  like Downing Street and Buckingham Palace, were being eroded “because of people like Burnham.”

What began as a legal dispute over attaching flags to street lamps rapidly became, in Bridge’s view, evidence that Britain’s children are being indoctrinated, universities are driving a liberal takeover and devolved political institutions somehow threaten Buckingham Palace and Downing Street.

Needless to say, embedded within the article is one of the Express’s familiar reader polls asking whether English towns should fly more St George’s flags.

The verdict, it seems, had already been written.

The post ‘Our children are being indoctrinated by the left wing’ while No. 10 in North is ‘disgusting’:  Operation Raise the Colours’ founder rages after High Court rejects flag campaign appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.