Letters - 04 November 2011
From conscientious objection to the cuts
Debt and the economy
Alan Smith (21 October) correctly highlights the important relationship between our fragile economic situation and the devastating destruction of the earth’s resources. He bases his argument on the conventional view of economics promoted by textbooks, the government and banks. However, ninety-seven percent of our money has been invented by the commercial banks. Hard as it is to believe, this means that almost all money in circulation is interest-bearing debt-money, dependent on loans to individuals, businesses and the government to conjure it into being. Michael Rowbotham, in The Grip of Death, explains the process thus:
‘The structure of debt finance demands that sufficient debt be undertaken to maintain the circulation of money. If consumers all went on an economy drive, and tried to buy only what they could afford, paying off their mortgages and eating baked beans… prices and incomes would have to adjust to the point at which sufficient people were forced back into debt to continue the money supply… no matter how thrifty consumers might be, overall, they must go into debt. Sufficient debt must be undertaken. The money supply demands it.’
When bank loans are repaid, the economy shrinks. This means that for each person, business, or government, that successfully climbs out of debt, others have to go into debt. At present, ‘paying off our debt’ as Alan Smith recommends, is simply not an option. The destructive impact of ‘debt’ on global warming will only be reduced when fundamental monetary reform puts more debt-free money into the economy.
Sue Holden
Conscientious objection and tax
A recent letter (21 October) asked what had happened to the Friends House staff’s conscience objection to payment of tax for military purposes. I suspect that I am the last staff member still in the employ of Friends House who was part of that small group. Because we paid our tax under the PAYE scheme we could not, as individuals, withhold that element of the tax that we calculated went to military expenditure. We had to ask our employer if they would be willing to do so on our behalf. Our employer was Meeting for Sufferings (MfS) and, crucially, if the tax was withheld they, and not us, would be held legally liable. After wrestling with the request, MfS asked Yearly Meeting if it would be right to take such a step. All the expected arguments were advanced: that it was a serious mistake to accede to withhold the tax because it was an illegal act; that our charitable status would be threatened; and that it would not achieve anything. But then a Friend spoke. She said that she agreed that it would be a serious mistake, but added ‘it may be a mistake we have to make’. The atmosphere of the session changed in an instant and the Yearly Meeting agreed to the staff request. MfS then instructed the general secretary of finance to withhold a given percentage of tax, pay it into a separate interest bearing account and to inform the Inland Revenue of the reason.
There was considerable correspondence with the tax authorities and the argument devolved to whether or not hypothecation was possible in the tax system. Eventually, the tax authorities signalled their readiness to take the Society to court and although several members of Sufferings bravely indicated their willingness to go to prison on the issue, the staff group felt that they could not ask someone else to suffer for their own conscience and asked for the outstanding tax to be paid under protest, ending the action.
Bill Chadkirk
Quaker statement on the cuts
Stuart White (28 October) raises interesting points about what Quakers can say about government cuts, and asks ‘Is this intended to be “the” statement on the cuts by Quakers at the national level?’. The short answer is, it is not! The news release BYM issued on 4 October was intended as a brief record of the issues raised at Meeting for Sufferings (MfS) on 1 October. The Equality Statement asked for by MfS is still being worked on, and will be the subject of discernment by Quaker Peace & Social Witness Central Committee before being brought back to MfS to be issued in its name. I am sure the comments from Stuart White and others can be taken into account in its drafting, and MfS will be considering the issues further. As Friends we are expressing ourselves publicly in other ways as well – QPSW has joined Church Action on Poverty’s ‘Close the Gap’ campaign, which includes four elements: fair taxes, fair prices, fair pay and a fair say.
Christine Cannon
Clerk, Meeting for Sufferings
