A state that serves and protects the powerful

The self-sacrificing and inspiring struggle by relatives of the Merseyside fans who needlessly died at Hillsborough in 1989 to establish the truth, must add to the erosion of public confidence in state institutions of rule and power.

It was an independent panel, not the state, that finally exposed the large-scale conspiracy to cover up police and emergency service failures at the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest.

Panel members fought for the disclosure of the documents that revealed that police altered witness statements and ran a concerted campaign to denigrate and blame the fans for their own deaths.

But we’re not just talking about the police here. Other key sections of the state were involved in allowing the police smear story to stand for nearly a quarter of a century.

The judicial system and the coroners’ court also closed ranks to block the real story from coming out. And Margaret Thatcher, then prime minister, was briefed that "the defensive – and at times close to deceitful – behaviour by senior officers in South Yorkshire sounds depressingly familiar".

The executive arm of the state under the Tories did not want to upset a relationship with the police that had served them well.

The same South Yorkshire police force brutally attacked miners at Orgreave, not far from Hillsborough, during their great strike in 1984. Undoubtedly, the contempt of the police for the working class was a factor in their shocking treatment of the Liverpool fans five years later.

What is at stake here is the nature and role of the state, what and who it serves and what can be done to transform how we are ruled.

Lord MacDonald, former Director of Public Prosecutions and now a Liberal peer, knows more than most about the power of the state to rule through secrecy. He told Radio 4 Today’s programme that the “real lesson is the inability of our state”, after an “operational catastrophe is to be truthful about what happened”.

There is a “tendency”, he added, for “British public authorities to see themselves as apart from the public” added to which was a “very deep and long-standing corruption within our police services”.

But MacDonald’s view of a “a culture of deceit” within the police which is “quite breathtaking” still doesn’t get to the nub of things. The police reflect the nature of the whole state, not just its repressive arm.

State secrecy and deceit is the norm, whether it’s the cosy relationship with corporate and financial power, the lies over the invasion of Iraq, or the hidden agenda over issues like nuclear power or the break-up of the NHS. Vital documents are simply kept under lock and key.

The “public authorities” don’t just see themselves as something separate. They are, in practice, just that. Just ask people with disabilities facing gruelling and distressing “assessment” by the Atos corporation.

Our present state system is alienated from society precisely because it exists not to serve people as a whole but to enforce the status quo. It is more accurate, therefore, to describe it as a capitalist state with institutions that ultimately reinforce each other in defence of privilege and power.

Former New Labour home secretary Jack Straw has blamed “police impunity” on Thatcher. That’s only part of the story. This impunity is to be found in the very nature of a force that is effectively the strong arm of the state. Think about Jean Charles de Menezes or Ian Tomlinson. Or Mark Duggan.

The Hillsborough report will impact on millions of people, not just football fans. Confidence in the police and other sections of the state is already at an all-time low.

A state that cannot and will not protect its citizens, economically, socially or physically, does not deserve our endorsement. Hillsborough is the case for a deconstruction of the present state system and its reconstruction along truly democratic, transparent, accountable lines.

Paul Feldman

Communications editor

  

Fans revolt grows

Will top flight football go the same way as the banks and collapse as debts become unpayable? Portsmouth FC is already in administration, the first Premier League club to suffer that fate, and many Manchester United fans fear the long-term future of the club is endangered by a mountain of debt.

That’s why many of them staged a colour-coded protest at yesterday’s Carling Cup final at Wembley. They chose to wave green and gold scarves and wore hats of the same colours instead of the United’s famous red and white in a protest organised by the Manchester United Supporters’ Trust (Must). The green and gold was intended as a symbolic reminder of Newton Heath, the club founded in 1878 that then became Manchester United in 1902.

Must is campaigning for the removal of the Glazer family, who run a US sports corporation. They bought United in 2005 with money borrowed from the banks. Last year, but for the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid for £81m, the massive interest payments on the club's £700m plus debt would have meant a net loss, although the club won the premiership and reached the final of the UEFA Champions League.

There’s a similar protest movement by Liverpool supporters, whose club has £300m in debt following a buy-out by another US business group. Fans are so concerned that there is even talk of a joint protest with arch rivals United when the teams meet in a few weeks.

The Premier League as a whole is the most indebted in Europe, owing more money than all the other clubs in Europe's top divisions put together. The European governing body UEFA calculates the combined debts of just 18 Premier League clubs at just under £3.5bn, around four times the figure for the next most indebted top division, Spain's La Liga.

The fans are angry that top clubs in England have become a milch cow for big corporations and that as a result, the game has become remote from ordinary working people whose support was once taken for granted. More than that, the sense of community that clubs provided has gone for good and replaced by expensive admission, merchandising and players tempted by huge salaries into boorish behaviour.

And where it was once possible for a variety of clubs to win trophies and titles, that is definitely no longer the case. Without a rich backer, clubs cannot bring in the world class players and managers. For many fans, the Premiership is reduced to a competition between a US corporation (United) and a Russian oligarch (Chelsea) and the rest struggle for the minor placings.

With banks reluctant to refinance debts except at punitive rates, the Premier League’s position can only worsen. As the recession deepens, more and more fans will become TV watchers rather than spectators. UEFA says the English model is unsustainable and will require clubs to break even financially from 2012-13. Naturally, the Football Association has insisted that English clubs should still be able to top up with external finance, in practice rejecting UEFA’s rule while signing up to it on paper.

On Saturday, fans from across the country attended a Beyond the Debt rally organised by FC United of Manchester, a club formed by United fans disillusioned by the Glazer takeover, and sponsored by Supporters Direct, a fans' organisation. Dave Boyle of Supporters Direct told the meeting: "Football clubs shouldn't be owned by individuals, or even a group of individuals. They should be owned by supporters."

Too right! And, of course, the same principle should extend to other areas of culture and the economy. Private, corporate ownership isn’t working. Common ownership and control, on a not-for-profit basis, is the way forward as our draft Manifesto proposes.

Paul Feldman
Communications editor

The spirit of Shankly lives on

“The socialism I believe in,” said the legendary Liverpool FC manager Bill Shankly, “is everybody working for the same goal and everybody having a share in the rewards. That’s how I see football, that’s how I see life.” He is no doubt turning in his grave over the plight of his former club, whose future is now in the hands of crisis-ridden banks.

Shankly’s sentiments, common enough amongst football fans through time, have long been side-lined and ignored as big money and even bigger egos have taken a grip on the clubs at the top of the game and steered them away from their historic roots into a very dangerous place – the capitalist market place.

Premier league clubs alone are in debt to the banks to the tune of £3 billion; the situation in the lower professional divisions is even more critical. The total debts of these clubs is over £400m. Many clubs in the lower divisions are in hock to the tax authorities and could go bust at any time.

Liverpool and Manchester United have debts of £350m and £650m respectively. Their new American owners in both cases are extracting large sums from the clubs just to finance the buying of them in the first place. It is by no means certain that Liverpool’s owners, Tom Hicks and George Gillett, will be able to extend or re-finance their loan with their bankers, the troubled RBS, in January. Everton, with debts of around £60m, is up for sale, but so far there are no takers.

It is possible that with TV money, continuing big crowds, loans from the billionaires, and a soft approach by the banks (unlikely now), they will be able to ride the storm for a while, but there will be no hiding place in the medium and long term. What happens when hundreds of thousands of fans lose their jobs or find their savings and pensions funds, if they have them, devalued? How will they possibly afford the high-priced tickets? There will be gaps in the stands, ticket prices will have to come down and revenue will fall.

The other, and perhaps the most important factor, that could overturn the survival strategies of the clubs is the fans themselves. Long taken for granted, they are now beginning to assert themselves. Many Liverpool fans, for example, would support a financial boycott of the club should the present American owners remain in control after January 2008. In a poll carried out by the Liverpool Supporters Network last week, three quarters of the 2,000 fans canvassed said they were willing to withdraw financial commitment to the club in the form of match tickets and merchandising.

In Manchester, when the Glazer family bought Manchester United in 2005, a group of angry fans set up a rival club United FC which regularly attracts over 2,000 to home matches and boasts on the home page of their website that “FC United is owned by its members”. An adult ticket to a home game costs £7.50. Governing bodies FIFA and UEFA, which have warned about the indebtedness of English clubs, have taken an interest in United FC’s progress.

In Liverpool at the beginning of the year 350 supporters packed into a pub in Anfield and set up what they claimed was the country’s first football supporters union, with a series of aims. A short term aim is “to hold whoever owns the football club to account” and the ultimate aim is “the supporter ownership of Liverpool Football Club”. They call themselves the “Spirit of Shankly”, they have the quote about socialism by Shankly on their banner, and they symbolise the spirit of revolt by fans of football at the way in which their passion has been prostituted by the profit agendas of the new owners.

Peter Arkell