'We’ve Lost the Keys'

by Les May

I joined Rochdale Young Socialists in August 1960.  A month later, I was outside the Scarborough Conference demonstrating my support for a motion proposing unilateral nuclear disarmament.  Famously Hugh Gaitskell who was leader of the Labour Party at the time said;

‘We may lose the vote today, and the result may deal this party a grave blow. It may not be possible to prevent this, but there are some of us, I think many of us, who will not accept that this blow need be mortal: who will not believe that such an end is inevitable.  There are some of us, Mr Chairman, who will fight, and fight, and fight again, to save the party we love.  We will fight, and fight, and fight again, to bring back sanity and honesty and dignity, so that our party -- with its great past -- may retain its glory and its greatness.’

Labour was deeply divided over the issue, but it is generally accepted that Gaitskell, ‘lost the vote and won the argument’.  When he was challenged for the leadership by Harold Wilson, who presented himself as a ‘unity not civil war’ candidate and who shared Gaitskell’s scepticism about unilateralism, Gaitskell got two thirds of the vote, which at that time was confined to Labour MPs.

Sixty years later the arguments remain the same.   Is it Labour MPs who should determine policy and select the leader, or is it the wider membership of the Labour party?   Speaking today on BB2’s Politics Live programme Angela Smith, one of the ‘Not So Magnificent Seven’ who resigned from the party today, rather gave the game away when she said ‘We’ve lost the keys’.  Like it or not, after 2015 we have seen a power shift within the Labour party, away from MPs and to the members.

Unsurprisingly Labour members like it that way and are ready to be critical of their MP when they feel he or she is being less than supportive of Corbyn’s leadership and/or party policy.   They may have a point.  There are some constituencies which are ‘solid Labour’, but in most it takes a lot of effort by local Labour members to ‘get the vote out’.

Another of the MPs who left Labour, Luciana Berger, has successfully managed to conflate two quite separate issues; criticism of Corbyn and anti-semitism. Until they were withdrawn her local party was set to debate two motions;

'The UK is in crisis because of the appalling austerity policies of a government that serves the interests of the rich.  We need a Labour government under the socialist leadership of our twice-elected leader Jeremy Corbyn. Instead of fighting for a Labour government our MP is continually using the media to criticise the man we all want to be Prime Minister.

'The Tories are deeply divided, but millions are still suffering from their austerity policies.  We desperately need a socialist Labour government led by Jeremy Corbyn.  Our MP is continually criticising our leader when she should be working for a general election and opposing the Tories.'

Not by any stretch of the imagination can either of these be described as ‘anti-semitic’.  Nor do they seem to me to justify Chuka Umunna’s comment quoted in the Jewish Chronicle, ‘How about demanding her CLP treats her with the respect she deserves?’  Clearly Chuka still has not yet got used to the idea that Labour MPs are no longer in the driving seat.

That’s not to say that Berger has not been subjected to antisemitic abuse, she has.  But the evidence points to the fact that it is coming from people who have nothing to do with the Labour party.  This is what Wikipedia has to say:

‘In January 2013, it was reported that a Merseyside music promoter, Philip Hayes, had been convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence and fined £120 after an "antisemitic tirade" against Berger at the Liverpool Music Awards.

'In October 2014, Garron Helm, a member of the small neo-Nazi National Action youth group was imprisoned for four weeks after he sent an antisemitic tweet to Berger in August 2014, serving two weeks before being released.  Following the conviction, it was reported that similar messages to her were being posted on Twitter.  According to Berger in December 2014, "[a]t the height of the abuse, the police said I was the subject of 2,500 hate messages in the space of three days" using the same hashtag.

'During the 2015 general election, UK Independence Party parliamentary candidate for West Lancashire Jack Sen was suspended from the party after sending an allegedly antisemitic tweet to Berger.
Joshua Bonehill-Paine , a supporter of Helm, was convicted of racially-aggravated harassment of Berger in December 2016 and sentenced to two years.

'In February 2017, John Nimmo was sentenced to 27 months in prison after pleading guilty to nine charges, including the sending of death threats and antisemitic messages to Berger.’

What Wikipedia also tells us it that in March 2018 Berger used Twitter to ask Jeremy Corbyn why he had queried the removal by a local council of an allegedly anti-semitic mural in 2012.   Using Twitter to do this rather than speaking to him directly or writing to him, suggests to me deliberate intent to cause trouble for Corbyn. 

*********** 

Not A Clever Idea

by Les May

Just after the 2016 Referendum I met a someone who is a member of the Heywood and Middleton Constituency Labour party. He was not impressed that our MP, Liz McInnes, had resigned from her shadow post as communities and local government minister as a gesture of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn.

Now Liz is one of the few MPs who have ‘had a proper job’ before becoming an MP so I am happy to vote for her. (I also have it from an impeccable source that a political opponent once said admiringly of her that she was known as ‘The Rottweiler’ for her determination to defend workers’ rights.)

A little lamely I muttered something that she would have come under a lot of pressure to join the herd who were calling for Corbyn to go.

An enthusiastic Corbyn supporter he was having none of it! He argued that Labour MPs should listen to the views of members of the local party and could not expect members to do the leg work for them at election time if they didn’t. And he was quite right of course.

I remembered this conversation last night when I read the response of Joan Ryan, the chair of Labour Friends of Israel, to losing a vote of no confidence at her local constituency party where she was accused of smearing Jeremy Corbyn.

So what was Ms Ryan’s response? She called the people who had voted against her ‘Trots, Stalinists, Communists and assorted hard left’.

Given that just over half of the people who attended the meeting voted against her, 94 out of 186, this may not have been the cleverest idea.  Why would any of these people who she has attacked in this unpleasant way want to go round the streets at the next election trying to persuade people to vote for her?

Joan Ryan is not a woman who is meticulous in checking her facts as you will see in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3dn-VV3czc

The video is about 26 minutes long.  The incident involving Joan Ryan starts at about 7 minutes and 40 seconds.

Chuka Ummuna’s recent comments are thought to have been prompted by the votes of no confidence in Joan Ryan and Chris Leslie.  It may just be a coincidence that both these MPs are members of the ‘Friends of Israel’ group. It may also be just a coincidence that Chuka Ummuna (and Angela Eagle) are seen in the video at the Friends of Israel stall asking to be updated. 

******** 

Sir Robert McAlpine & the truth on blacklist?

THE Speaker of the House of Commons and the Sir Robert McAlpine chief executive both joined the war of words about the £29m contract to refurbish Big Ben being awarded to the blacklist company.  On Tuesday 5th September during a Westminster Hall debate on blacklisting MPs including Labour and SNP frontbenchers, Jack Dromey and Chris Stephens, joined Chuka Ummuna in calling for the company that was at the very heart of The Consulting Association human rights scandal to be stripped of the Big Ben contract. 

The former shadow business secretary Chuka Umunna went further on Thursday 7th by raising a 'point of order' on the floor of the House of Commons asking the Speaker, his "views and advice with regard to the matter of Big Ben" adding, "what message do you think it sends to the victims of this gross injustice for this House to award a contract to a firm that not only funded the Consulting Association, but provided its first chair and ​another chair?"

John Bercow replied: that the question was "perfectly legitimately and reasonable" adding that although the company had been awarded the initial contract to provide scaffolding, the full contract had not yet been officially awarded to McAlpine.  The Speaker of the House of Commons summed up by confirming:

"It is important.   We are sensitive to it and we will be conscious in the days ahead of the reputational importance", and told MPs that he would make enquiries and make a further statement.

Stung by the ongoing criticism, the chief executive of Sir Robert McAlpine Limited, Paul Hamer wrote a letter to a number of newspapers claiming that "blacklisting has no place now or in the future” at his firm and that the contractor was committed fully to "a zero-tolerance policy towards blacklisting, illegal or unfair recruitment practices”.  Adding that “I am pleased to confirm that Sir Robert McAlpine complies fully with all legislation to prevent blacklisting and is committed to fair and transparent recruitment.”

Roy Bentham, blacklisted carpenter from Liverpool and Blacklist Support Group, joint secretary responded to the McAlpine statement:

"Paul Hamer might be the CEO but Cullum McAlpine owns the company and I sat behind Cullum McAlpine when he gave evidence to the select committee investigation. Upon advice from his lawyer who was sitting next to him throughout, the blacklister in chief smugly refused to answer questions put to him by MPs. 

"The select committee report stated that they were 'far from certain that all of our witnesses have told us 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth', despite many of them being under oath'.  Blacklisted workers completely agree with that assessment by MPs".

"30 years ago Sir Robert McAlpine Limited* denied blacklisting people as part of the Economic League, 10 years ago they denied blacklisting people as part of The Consulting Association.  And now they assure us that they've given up blacklisting completely.  Given the company's previous honesty on blacklisting, how could anybody possibly not believe them now?"

Unite assistant general secretary, Gail Cartmail said workers were “continuing to have their lives ruined simply for being a member of a union”.

*  In May last year, Sir Robert McAlpine Limited was one of eight multi-national contractors that made a public apology alongside a record breaking multi-million pound compensation payout in order to avoid prosecution at the High Court. 

Eight contractors – Balfour Beatty, Carillion, Costain, Kier, Laing O’Rourke, Sir Robert McAlpine, Skanska and Vinci.

McAlpine Boss: No More Blacklisting!

Huffington Post

MPs said it was a ‘scandal’ firm won lucrative Big Ben contract.

08/09/2017 10:14

A CONSTRUCTION firm blasted by MPs after it was awarded a lucrative contract to refurbish Big Ben says it will never allow blacklisting to happen again.

Sir Robert McAlpine was one of eight major companies who had to pay out compensation after admitting it had penalised workers who were trade unionists or took part in union activities. 

Hundreds of construction employees across the country lost their jobs and were unable to find further work after they were blacklisted by industry giants through a shadowy organisation known as ‘The Consulting Association’, which kept lists of names.

- ADVERTISEMENT -

Despite this, the government awarded McAlpine a lucrative £29 million contract to prepare the House of Commons’ Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben for refurbishment work.

MPs, including Labour’s Chuka Umunna and Jack Dromey and the SNP’s Chris Stephens, said firms that had been historically involved in blacklisting should face the consequences.

At a Westminster Hall debate on Tuesday, Dromey, a former trade union activist, said it was “a scandal” that McAlpine had been handed a Commons contract and GMB chief Tim Roache said the deal should be cancelled.

McAlpine’s new CEO, Paul Hamer, wrote to HuffPost UK following our report and said the company was committed to making sure blacklisting “stays firmly in the past”.

“Since my arrival, it has been one of my priorities to review the company’s HR and recruitment functions.  I am pleased to confirm that Sir Robert McAlpine complies fully with all legislation to prevent blacklisting and is committed to fair and transparent recruitment,” he said. 

“Blacklisting in construction was, until 2009, an industry-wide issue.   Sir Robert McAlpine admitted and apologised for its involvement with The Consulting Association and amended its HR practices, policies and operations to ensure that it can never happen again.”  

Hamer, who joined McAlpine just over a month ago, said his company was subject to “significant and appropriate scrutiny” before being awarded the Commons contract, which will see the chimes of Big Ben paused for four years while major restorative works are carried out.  

“We carefully check the recruitment and employment practices of all our sub-contractors to ensure they meet our own high standards,” he added.  

“We have a zero tolerance policy towards blacklisting, illegal or unfair recruitment practices.  In summary, I can assure you that blacklisting has no place now nor in the future at Sir Robert McAlpine.”

Business minister Margot James promised the government would look into the future awarding of contracts to firms involved in blacklisting.

*****

Blacklist Group report on Big Ben contract

MPs lined up to call for a public inquiry into blacklisting and for Sir Robert McAlpine to be stripped of the contract to refurbish Big Ben during a parliamentary debate earlier today (Tues 5th September).

 Blacklisting company Sir Robert McAlpine have already been paid £3.5m of public money to carry out the enabling works on Big Ben and are in line for another bumper £29m pay-out to complete the 4 year refurbishment project.
The human rights of over 3000 construction workers were breached when they were repeatedly denied work simply for their trade union membership. MPs questioned whether Sir Robert McAlpine Ltd, as the driving force behind the
blacklist, was the right contractor to be carrying out the works on Big Ben: the symbol of British democratic values.

 Shadow minister for labour, Jack Dromey said: "there has to be consequences for historic blacklisting" adding that "it is a scandal that the iconic Big Ben contract has been given to that company' [Sir Robert McAlpine]

 The SNP employment spokesperson, Chris Stephens MP said:  

'Blacklisting firms have grown rich on public sector contracts' arguing that is was an 'act of bad faith by the government that the one of the main perpetrators is being given access to public money'

 The call for Sir Robert McAlpine to be stripped of the Big Ben contract was repeated by numerous MPs including Chuka Ummuna throughout the packed Westminster Hall debate.

 During the debate, Chuka Ummuna presented previously unreported evidence gathered from FOI requests that show emails between Crossrail and contractors on the publicly funded project that showed continuing surveillance of union members.  Ummuna described the new evidence as 'ugly underbelly of this sector that continues to go unaddressed' and repeated the call for a full public inquiry to finally get the truth behind this hidden human rights conspiracy.

 Conservative minister Margot James flailed in her attempted defence of the government’s inaction, claiming that the 'government take the issue of blacklisting very seriously' but point blankly refused to answer direct questions about the controversial Big Ben contract from Chuka Ummuna, Chris Stephens and Jack Dromey.

The blacklisting conspiracy is linked to the undercover police scandal as senior officers from police units engaged in spying on so-called ‘domestic extremists’ attended and gave a PowerPoint presentation at one of the meetings of the illegal Consulting Association.  Chuka Ummuna said:  that documents 'strongly suggests that some of the evidence was supplied with the collusion of the police or the security services.'

Vic Williams blacklisted electrician from Leytonstone in east London said:
'12 months ago, the big construction companies gave us an apology for their involvement in blacklisting.  They were only sorry for getting caught.  McAlpine are coining in taxpayers money, they’re laughing at us. If MPs had any moral compass, they’d strip McAlpine of the Big Ben contract.'

Dave Smith, blacklisted construction worker and secretary of the Blacklist Support Group commented:

'In all the media coverage of the Houses of parliament construction works, Big Ben was described as the symbol of British democratic values. So how can a company that breached the human rights of thousands of honest construction workers be a suitable contractor for one of the most prestigious construction projects in the world? The iconic bell of Big Ben might have fallen silent but blacklisted workers refuse to remain silent until those guilty of orchestrating this national scandal are forced to account for their actions at a public inquiry.'

Sir Robert McAlpine Limited is also a major financial donor to the Conservative Party.

Trade unionists 'blacklisted for Crossrail jobs', MPs told

MPs condemn award of Big Ben contract to firm that blacklisted workers

MP claims construction workers are still being blacklisted | Construction Enquirer

MPs blast 'scandal' of handing Big Ben revamp to firm linked to blacklisting

MPs call for construction company at centre of blacklisting claims to be stripped of Big Ben refurbishment contract

Crossrail says 'no evidence' of blacklisting despite MP's claim

Roy Bentham says 'Blacklist never went away!'

Blacklisting debate in parliament 

5th September 2017 - 1:30pm 

Westminster Hall

Houses of Parliament

Blacklisting will be debated again by MPs in parliament in September after Chuka Umunna secured a Westminster Hall debate. This parliamentary procedure will last around 90 minutes and allows Chuka and other MPs who attend to ask questions of the government minister. This is an excellent opportunity to contact your own MP to ask them to attend the debate and raise issues such as ongoing contemporary blacklisting, a public inquiry or why public sector contracts are still being awarded to blacklist firms.

Roy Bentham, the Blacklist Support Group joint secretary, and a blacklisted carpenter from Merseyside commented:

"Despite the human rights conspiracy being exposed in the High Court, blacklisting has never gone away. Many union members continue to be barred from major construction projects right now in 2017. As someone who fell foul of contemporary blacklisting recently by Carillion on the Liverpool Royal Hospital, this parliamentary debate is most welcome. But the time for talking is over, what we need is action".

Blacklist Support Group will be attending - assemble 12:30pm outside the public entrance to parliament for any press photos etc.
 
Please Note: Westminster Hall debates take place in the Grand Committee Room off of Westminster Hall, NOT the chamber of the House of Commons.

Blacklisting: A story far from over

 By Gordon Anderson in 'Construction News'
3 April, 2017

THE story of blacklisting is a well-known one - and one that many thought was consigned to the past. But with the file reopened late last year, could there be more to come?
Many years since the initial revelations, the story of construction blacklisting far from over.
In December 2016, information commissioner Elizabeth Denham reopened the blacklisting file, starting a watching brief to monitor the on-going practices of the construction industry.
And in February this year, Labour MP Chuka Umunna called on Parliament to open a public inquiry into blacklisting practices in public construction projects, backed by Unite.
Construction companies would be wise to improve their systems to avoid a sequel to the 2009 story.

The blackstory

Blacklists were a secret database run by the Consulting Association that collected the names, religion, union membership, National Insurance numbers and other personal information on thousands of construction workers.
Over 16 years, the names of more than 3,000 individuals were put on this list without their knowledge.
Construction companies would run the names of potential employees against the list and, as a result, hundreds of workers lost their jobs and were unable to find work for years without knowing why.
The privacy of these individuals was gravely infringed, and often the information on the list was not even correct.

“In May 2016, several out-of-court settlements were reached by construction companies, who were estimated to have paid out £50m in compensation to 771 workers and £25m in legal fees”

In 2009, Ian Kerr, the man who ran the list, was prosecuted for failing to register as a data controller and 14 construction companies including Balfour Beatty and Kier were issued enforcement notices by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for violating the data protection principles that dictate that personal information must be used fairly.
Lawsuits followed in the civil courts where workers and unions demanded damages for the injustices they suffered.
In May 2016, several out-of-court settlements were reached by construction companies, who were estimated to have paid out £50m in compensation to 771 workers and £25m in legal fees.
The practice of blacklisting subjected thousands of workers to an unfair system of recruitment, leaving many individuals without work for years. And the companies involved in the practice not only suffered large settlement bills, but were publicly censured and suffered a blow to their reputation.

More to come?

In 2017, the story of blacklisting may seem to be on the backburner. But with the renewed call for a public inquiry and the ICO’s open file on blacklisting, there may be more to come.
If there were a second investigation into blacklisting, the ICO has greater powers this time around.
For conduct taking place after 6 April 2010, the ICO now has the ability to enforce higher fines of up to £500,000.
In 2009, the ICO was only able to prosecute the party running the list, but not the companies who used the list. This was widely criticised and it is likely that this limitation could be changed.
Construction companies should stay vigilant in preventing any form of blacklisting, starting with understanding the legislation.

“In 2009, the ICO was only able to prosecute the party running the list, but not the companies who used the list. This was widely criticised and it is likely that this limitation could be changed”

The Data Protection Act 1998 protects the personal information and data of individuals. Section 4 of the act outlines the data protection principles, and it is the responsibility of everyone – corporates and individuals alike – to follow them.
In summary, when using personal information one must ensure that it is used fairly and lawfully, that it is for a limited and specifically stated purpose, that the use is not excessive, it is accurate, and that it is kept safe and secure and for no longer than is necessary for the stated purpose.
If the ICO finds a contravention of these principles it has the power to issue an enforcement notice alerting that the identified conduct must cease. It is a criminal offence to fail to comply with the enforcement notice and offences are punishable by fine.

A helpful framework

To assist employers in staying within the data protection rules, the ICO published the Employment Practices Code in 2011.
Part 1 of the code outlines good practice when using personal data in the recruitment process. It states that an employer should only seek information that is relevant to the recruitment decision being made.
Where it is necessary to obtain documents or information about the worker from a third party, the employer should obtain consent from the worker.
If in the process of verifying or vetting an applicant the information produces discrepancies, the applicant should be given the opportunity to make representations. Where information is received that affects the individual’s privacy, they should be made aware of this.
These are some of the many practices that construction companies should follow.
While the Data Protection Act is the definitive law on the matter, the ICO’s code can provide a helpful framework.
Gordon Anderson is partner and head of the London construction team at Irwin Mitchell

Bitter Battle Inside Unite Union

UNITE the Union achieved a huge turnout of branches with nominations in the election for the union’s general secretary – the largest number ever, with close to 1,500 branches.
The Unite acting general secretary Gail Cartmail said today:  'It is very welcome that so many Unite branches and members have taken a full part in the nominating process for our elections for general secretary and executive council, the greatest democratic procedure in the labour movement.'
Almost 1,500 branches of Unite, Britain and Ireland’s biggest trade union, have made nominations in the election for the union’s general secretary – the largest number ever.
Len McCluskey, the union’s current general secretary, received 1,185 branch nominations, representing 559,000 Unite members.
Gerard Coyne, Unite’s West Midlands regional secretary, received 187 branch nominations, representing 98,000 Unite members.
Ian Allinson, a popular shop-floor worker at Fujitsu in Manchester and former member of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), received 76 branch nominations, representing 37,000 Unite members.
The election for general secretary of Unite threatens to be bitter, and last week The Guardian reported that McCluskey as head of Unite gave Gerald Coyne a 'final written warning' for speaking at an event held by Labour for the 'Common Good', a group founded by Chuka Umunna and Tristram Hunt, two MPs who declined to join Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow Labour cabinet.
Coyne was invited to the event in January 2016 by the MP for Birmingham Erdington, Jack Dromey, and spoke alongside other union leaders including John Park, assistant general secretary at Community. The event was attended by 40 MPs.
Mr. Dromey was previously the Deputy General Secretary of the Transport & General Workers' Union, which became Unite was formed on 1 May 2007, after a merger of Amicus and the Transport & General Workers' Union.  Interestingly, Dromey is married to the senior Labour politician Harriet Harman.

According to The Guardian (25th, Januuary 2017):
'Coyne attended a disciplinary hearing on 1 March, where McCluskey said he had read a transcript of the Labour MPs’ meeting.
It seems that there was a disciplinary letter that followed a few days later, in which McCluskey added:
'Given the sensitivity within the Labour party at the moment with constant attacks on the leadership of the party and a clear determination by some to undermine Corbyn and create alternatives, the question is: should a senior officer in Unite have chosen to speak on such a platform (any platform) without seeking the views/authority of the chief of staff or the general secretary or at least sought guidance from the political department.'

Nearly 1,500 branches of Unite, Britain and Ireland’s biggest trade union, have made nominations in the election for the union’s general secretary – the largest number ever.
Len McCluskey, the union’s incumbent general secretary, received 1,185 branch nominations, representing 559,000 Unite members.
Gerard Coyne, Unite’s West Midlands regional secretary, received 187 branch nominations, representing 98,000 Unite members.
Ian Allinson, an employee of Fujitsu in Manchester, received 76 branch nominations, representing 37,000 Unite members.
Unite acting general secretary Gail Cartmail said today: “It is very welcome that so many Unite branches and members have taken a full part in the nominating process for our elections for general secretary and executive council, the greatest democratic procedure in the labour movement.
“The very strong level of participation is good for our democracy and I would urge all Unite members to take the chance to vote when ballot papers are distributed later this month.”
In addition to branch nominations, Unite members in workplaces not covered by a workplace branch can make nominations.  Len McCluskey received 132 such nominations, Gerard Coyne 21 and Ian Allinson 21.
Ballot papers for both elections are distributed from March 27, and the ballot closes on April 19.
- See more at: http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/record-number-of-nominations-in-unite-general-secretary-election-2017/#sthash.XQXb6eS3.dpuf

Nearly 1,500 branches of Unite, Britain and Ireland’s biggest trade union, have made nominations in the election for the union’s general secretary – the largest number ever.
Len McCluskey, the union’s incumbent general secretary, received 1,185 branch nominations, representing 559,000 Unite members.
Gerard Coyne, Unite’s West Midlands regional secretary, received 187 branch nominations, representing 98,000 Unite members.
Ian Allinson, an employee of Fujitsu in Manchester, received 76 branch nominations, representing 37,000 Unite members.
Unite acting general secretary Gail Cartmail said today: “It is very welcome that so many Unite branches and members have taken a full part in the nominating process for our elections for general secretary and executive council, the greatest democratic procedure in the labour movement.
“The very strong level of participation is good for our democracy and I would urge all Unite members to take the chance to vote when ballot papers are distributed later this month.”
In addition to branch nominations, Unite members in workplaces not covered by a workplace branch can make nominations.  Len McCluskey received 132 such nominations, Gerard Coyne 21 and Ian Allinson 21.
Ballot papers for both elections are distributed from March 27, and the ballot closes on April 19.
- See more at: http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/record-number-of-nominations-in-unite-general-secretary-election-2017/#sthash.XQXb6eS3.dpuf

Nearly 1,500 branches of Unite, Britain and Ireland’s biggest trade union, have made nominations in the election for the union’s general secretary – the largest number ever.
Len McCluskey, the union’s incumbent general secretary, received 1,185 branch nominations, representing 559,000 Unite members.
Gerard Coyne, Unite’s West Midlands regional secretary, received 187 branch nominations, representing 98,000 Unite members.
Ian Allinson, an employee of Fujitsu in Manchester, received 76 branch nominations, representing 37,000 Unite members.
Unite acting general secretary Gail Cartmail said today: “It is very welcome that so many Unite branches and members have taken a full part in the nominating process for our elections for general secretary and executive council, the greatest democratic procedure in the labour movement.
“The very strong level of participation is good for our democracy and I would urge all Unite members to take the chance to vote when ballot papers are distributed later this month.”
In addition to branch nominations, Unite members in workplaces not covered by a workplace branch can make nominations.  Len McCluskey received 132 such nominations, Gerard Coyne 21 and Ian Allinson 21.
Ballot papers for both elections are distributed from March 27, and the ballot closes on April 19.
- See more at: http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/record-number-of-nominations-in-unite-general-secretary-election-2017/#sthash.XQXb6eS3.dpuf

According to Gerard Coyne, it appears that based on figures from Corbyn’s entries in the parliamentary register of members’ interests, Unite had given Corbyn £225,000 in the space of 14 months. The union also provided Corbyn with more than £41,000 in other benefits such as staff and office space.
Coyne has also been critical of  the Copeland result in Cumbria. 
Coyne told The Guardian: 'In terms of outcome in Copeland, it was a meltdown in support for Labour and I think there are some very clear reasons why that happened. The reality is that Unite has put an awful lot of money into funding a leader of the Labour party who seems to be out of step with the industrial policies and needs of our members.'
Today, Guido Fawkes on his Blog reported in a post entitled 'Jobs for Votes':

'Another Unite member and staffer said:

'We all thought staff would be left to make their own decision on who they want to run Unite, but I’ve been put under massive pressure to vote for Len and I’m really worried about what will happen if I don’t.

'Unfortunately this exactly what we expected given the culture in Unite, and we’re expecting more of the same at the nomination meeting on Thursday.' 

On Ian Allinson's Blog someone called James Dick posted the following post:
'the last time there was a vote we voted against len and what a responce we got from the other branches in our sector. it was like voting for trump everyone was going nuts, saying it was noted we had backed the other guy and did we not know it was uncle lens country. hope you get enough backing but i think its going to be tought'
Mr. McCluskey must have known that when he called this unnecessary election would open up wounds. In the end the net result will be to damage both Unite and the Labour Party.

Blacklist Debate in Parliament

THE Labour MP, Chuka Umunna, has secured a Westminster Hall debate in parliament with the title 'Blacklisting in the construction industry' for 4pm - 4:30pm on Wednesday 8th February.  

The debate is open to the public and Blacklist Support Group urges supporters inside and outside the UK parliament to turn up.  If you're coming, make sure you arrive early enough to get through the long queue at security.  'Blacklisted' t-shirts are a good look for the media. 

The Blacklist Support Group continue to campaign for a full pubic inquiry into the blacklisting scandal.

Blacklist Support Group

book: http://newint.org/books/politics/blacklisted-secret-war/

video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNcgrNs6pB8

facebook: http://www.facebook.com/groups/blacklistSG/

blog: www.hazards.org/blacklistblog

Is it time to Breed for Britain?

by Les May

IN a recent article I made reference to the fall in the UK birth rate since 1960, and the impact this will have on my children's generation.  But the UK is not alone in this regard.  A fall in the birth rate since 1960 is a phenomenon which is common to all 28 EU countries according to William Reville,  emeritus professor of biochemistry at University College Cork.

In an article headed 'Why is Europe losing the will to breed?' in last Thursday's Irish Times Reville points out that to keep the population of a country constant it is necessary for each woman to give birth to 2.1 children on average.  He provides data which shows that the mean birthrate throughout the EU is only 1.56.  Ireland has the highest birth rate of 1.94 and Portugal the lowest at 1.23, though there are four more countries where the birth rate is less than 1.4.  For comparison the present birth rate in the UK is 1.81.

He goes on to say :

'European societies increasingly are no longer self sustaining.  For example, if current trends continue, every new generation of Spaniards will be 40% smaller than the previous one.  In Italy the percentage of the population over 65 will increase from 2.7% now to 18.8% in 2050.  By 2060 the population of Germany is projected to drop from 81 millions to 67 millions and by 2030 the UN projects that by 2030 the percentage of Germans in the work force will drop by 7% to 54%.  In order to compensate for this shortage Germany needs to absorb 533,000 immigrants per year, which puts Angela Merkel's current immigration policy into context.'

As I have argued in an earlier article this matters because the non-working section of the population, children, older people, the sick and the disabled, rely upon the surplus generated by the fraction of the population which is working.  Such a situation is only sustainable if the fraction of the working, i.e. younger, population is sufficiently high both to support themselves and generate a large enough surplus.

But as Reville points out in the longer term this immigration is not a solution because when the birth rate falls to about 1.5 even immigration will not hold the population steady over time.

Whilst I have focussed upon the fact that for the immediate future there seems little alternative to continued immigration whichever side is victorious in the upcoming referendum, the economic case is only part of the picture.  Large scale migration has an impact upon the host society.

As Reville puts i:

 'European civilisation has given the world many cherished values, freedoms and institutions, including the classical legacy of Greece and Rome; the rule of law; the separation of church and state; modern science; individual freedom; a fabulous heritage of music, painting, sculpture and architecture, and more.'

This too matters, because quoting Reville again:

'European values are not universal and there is no necessary reason to expect other civilisations to adopt these values simply because they come to Europe to partake of the technical and commercial fruits of western civilisation.'  

It is fashionable to ignore such concerns and to dismiss those who raise them as 'xenophobic' or 'racist', but there is a good moral case to be made for taking a more robust approach to immigration.  

Immigration benefits the individual migrant;  immigrants make the journey in search of a better life. 

It benefits a receiving nation like the UK by adding to the workforce and helps produce that surplus which will pay the pensions of those retiring around the year 2030.  But it impoverishes the donor nation especially when the migrant is a well qualified young person who has been trained at the expense of the donor nation.

There is nothing new in this.  After the WW2 the UK needed to produce and export as much as possible, (and build the Welfare State on the surplus).  So immigration from countries like Ireland was encouraged. An elderly friend who died a year ago came from Ireland at the age of 26 in 1948 to work in a Castleton (Rochdale) mill and did not think it an indignity that a medical check was made to make sure she was not pregnant.  Being as she put it 'a big strong farm girl' she was given better paid 'men's work' and became a mule spinner.  And very happy she was to spend the rest of her life here.

In Germany, Angela Merkel's cabinet has approved new measures to help the country to deal with the influx of more than a million new immigrants.  In return for a package providing immigrants with better access to the job market and the creation of 100,000 government funded 'job opportunities', migrants will be expected to undertake orientation and language courses.  The cabinet statement said:

'Learning the German language quickly, rapid integration in training, studies and the labour market, and an understanding of and compliance with the principles of living together in our society and compliance with our laws are essential for successful integration... The newcomers are to become good neighbours and citizens, which will enable us to strengthen social cohesion and prevent parallel structures in our country.'

This contrast sharply with what to date has been the UK approach which has sometimes generated an exceptionalism in the name of multi-culturalism.  Recently Labour MP Chuka Umunna has launched a new All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on social integration.  Whether it will 'bite the bullet' in quite the way that the German cabinet has I don't know.  Unless it argues the case for investment in integrating migrants into our way of life it may just prove to be another talking shop.

If you don't like my argument that immigration is necessary to pay the pensions of my children's generation the answer is in your own hands.  Go forth and multiply.

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/brexit-and-wars-of-roses.html

http://www.chuka.org.uk/social_integration_launch

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-151319/Birth-rate-drops-lowest-ever.html

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Fertility_statistics