The Significance of Roberts Arundel in the 1960s

by Brian Bamford

Northern trade unionists confront police at Roberts Arundel

IN Nov 2006, the anarchist historian, Nick Heath* reflected upon his experiences in the UK anarchist movement since the 1960s, and the lessons on organisation and politics he finds valid for anarchists today.  His observations include the idea that '[o]rganisational responsibility and discipline should not be controversial'. [see 'The UK anarchist movement - Looking back and forward' posted on libcom].

Part way through his long account he ponders the problems of the failures of anarchists since its high point in the early to mid-1960s during the rise of the peace movement:
'One of the shortcomings that they had highlighted was the lack of industrial activity.  As Brian Bamford, whom I do not often agree with, has pointed out:  “At the time of disputes at Roberts-Arundel in Stockport**, Pilkington’s Glassworks in St Helens***, the strikes and stay-in occupations at Upper Clyde Shipbuilders and in engineering, the miners struggles in the 1970s, the anarchist influence was tiny” (Freedom 6 August 1994)'

This year it is the 50th anniversary of the Roberts Arundel strike in Stockport, and Stockport Trade Union Council has put on an exhibition to commemorate the occasion.

At the time of the strike at Roberts-Arundel in 1966, mentioned in the above quote from Freedom, the Manchester Anarchist Group [MAG] was far bigger than the small International Socialist body with only 20 members locally and most of whom were students.   Both Colin Barker and his then friend and fellow sociologist John Lee, who later like me became an ethnomethodologist, were anxious to engage with me and some of the local working-class anarchists.  They knew that I had been involved in the national strikes of the engineering apprentices in the early 1960s, and still edited the apprentice paper Industrial Youth that came out of those disputes; both Colin and John were keen to collaborate with us with a view of building up their own I.S. group.  The trouble then was that most of the Manchester anarchists in the MAG didn't have any affinity with factory workers and trade unionists.  They were good on peace demos etc. waving their black and red flags, but it was as if they were frightened of engaging with genuine workers at their places of work.

When I was sacked for supporting the apprentices at Robinsons in Rochdale in 1965, the MAG refused to come down because they said they didn't want to be 'authoritarian', and tell the apprentices what to do!  Again in 1966, when I was given my marching orders at Tomlinsons up Milnrow the MAG held aloof yet again steering clear of the factory gates.  In similar circumstances I doubt that Colin Barker and I.S. would have been so timid, but by that time I had already decided to return to Spain, where I had a job waiting among the more practical and proletarian Gibraltar anarchists.

Under the influence of Ron Marsden, and Alan Barlow**** when the Manchester anarchists discussed the Roberts-Arundel dispute at a meeting at Mother Macs pub in central Manchester, the meeting was swayed and persuaded to not attend a support meeting called by the International Socialists [IS] to support the Roberts-Arundel strikers, the reasoning at that time being that they didn't want to swell the support for the trotskyists in IS.  This is significant and relevant to what Mr. Heath is saying, yet I believe both he and Colin Barker draw the wrong conclusions in arguing that the anarchists and international socialists needed a national organisation or party.

In an interview with Colin Barker, now a retired sociology lecturer, in 2015 in the publication RS21 (Revolutionary Socialism in the 21st Century) vividly describes the situation he found himself with the IS in 1966 at the time of the Roberts-Arundel dispute:
'We were a group of about twenty people.  We’d got the building workers, and we were talking on very friendly terms with one or two CP engineers.  By then I think we’d recruited one or two.  We look as if we’re going to recruit significant numbers of militant workers to the branch – I don’t want to exaggerate, but we’re a little bit confident, a little bit rooted.  We’re distinctive.  We don’t know that you can’t do things – that’s quite important, we don’t know of any limits to what we can do.  So we take initiatives, try things out, sometimes they don’t work and sometimes they do.  This is in ’67 – the next year of course everything changed.'  (rs21onAugust 5, 2015)

Clearly the advantage that the Manchester International Socialist had in 1965 was not that of a mass organised party, but rather that of disciplined organised body but rather an imaginative tendency that was willing to act on its own initiative.  By acting outside the box the IS was enabled to have a great impact in regional industrial disputes such as Roberts-Arundel in Stockpost and at Pilkingtons in St Helens.  Meanwhile, the Manchsester anarchists who were so heroic in the peace demos in central Manchester were too timid when it came to turning up at the factory gates.

Drawing up a neat historical narrative

Like all historians Mr. Heath provides us with neat narrative to explain what was wrong, and how the anarchist decline could have been avoided in the past, but also how its continuing fall in the present and in the future can be stemmed:
i]  The historic issue, according to Mr. Heath, was that there was 'The increasing frustration with the swamp of pacifism, liberalism and vague humanism'.

ii]  Two now defunct bodies entitled ASA (Anarchist Syndicalist Alliance) and ORA (Organisation of Revolutionary Anarchists) were potentially Mr. Heath's ideal tools for social change, but he writes the 'ASA ran out of steam pretty quickly'.
[I personally was one of the founding members of this short-lived ASA organisation, which was set-up around 1970 from remnants of the old Manchester Syndicalist Workers Federation, and went on to play a role in the Courtaulds Arrow Mill strike involving mainly Asian workers in Rochdale, and later to successful campaign for shop stewards in textiles inside the National Union of Textile & Allied Workers*****].

iii} On the other hand, Heath writes that 'The ORA had started moving away from the swamp as a result of the dockers and miners struggles and the influences of French libertarian communists.'

Mr. Heath quotes from an ORA booklet entitled 'Towards a history and critique of the anarchist movement in recent times' by K. Nathan. R. Atkins, C. Williams [ORA pamphlet no1. 1971] to support his diagnoses about the rise of Trotskyism and the fall of anarchism in the late 1960s and earlier 1970s:
'The IS [the International Socialists which later became the SWP] would not have attained their size and influence such as it is if a decent libertarian organisation had existed.  It is an unholy mixture of libertarian and Leninist groups.  The attempt by Cliffe (sic) to compete with IMG by out-trotting Mandel will make this alliance increasingly unstable. BUT do we have any capacity to attract these comrades?  In fact, the flow has been the other way. Good comrades (for the most part industrial militants rather than students) have been lost without anyone attempting to understand why.'

He argues that that was a true analysis and remains so today.   Hence, he claims, that in spite of what he calls 'the decline of Leninism' it was a 'lack of effective organisation', that has meant that anarchism will be at a standstill until we rectify this problem of organisation.

What this shows is that Nick Heath has a mechanistic Marxist approach to organisation that is rooted in a form of deterministic thinking that is part of the problem.  The main problem among the anarchists, which has been amply demonstrated in most recent times at the London Anarchist Bookfair etc., is a psychological inability to engage with real people in the real world.  Some of the left don't have an engaging relationship with working people.  This has been a long term problem which no amount of management, membership cards, statements aims and principle, mission statements, or tick lists can solve. 

Because Mr. Heath has been a white-collar office worker (a librarian) for much of his life he looks at the problem in a top-down way so that all he comes up with are cookbook solutions.  In the same way his close colleague Mike Ballard - now a retired local authority housing manager - has a similar cultural problem.  Commenting in another essay entitled 'Anarchist communism in Britain, 1870-1919', on the libertarian organisation founded in 1960 called 'SOLIDARITY', Mr. Heath writes:
'Their wilful failure to translate this into the establishment of a national organisation was a disaster, as International Socialism (the precursor of the Socialist Workers Party) was able to build on this territory abandoned by Solidarity (and by the Anarchist Federation of Britain).  They failed to engage as fully with the Anarchist movement as much as they could have, as their contributions at meetings and conferences could have considerably strengthened the class struggle current within it.' 

Thoughts on aspects of northern anarchism

There were some protests from southerners and Mr. Heath's type of 'organisational anarchists', when on November 2011, Sidney Huffman wrote his interesting  'Message from a North East Anarchists' on libcom:

'We believe the anarchists may actually be the single largest radical tendency in the North-East and wider North, yet we remain largely invisible, rarely initiating action ourselves and instead just tagging along in ones and twos with events organised by the left and liberals.  We have repeatedly found anarchists who have joined Trotskyist parties simply because they couldn't find an organised anarchist presence here.  Older comrades coming out of premature retirement spend 6 months looking for political anarchists and cannot find any during that time.  It is not good enough.  If we are serious about change, we have to step up and make ourselves visible.'

What's interesting about this statement and some of the protesting comments that followed it, is the implied organisational and activist nature of what is being proclaimed.  Sidney Huffmann writes about 'tagging along in ones and twos' on other people's events tail-ending other left protests.

In response to Mr. Huffman, Tom Harrison wrote on libcom that the 'SF [Solidarity Federation] and AF [Anarchist Federation] have been turning out regularly at the sparks strikes/demos/blockades in London, bolstering picket lines and generally providing the much needed solidarity for these workers. There was a particularly good SF turnout at the sparks demo on November 9th ... just watch this vid and you can see their placards at many point.  We're also organising and attempting to link student militancy with worker militancy.'

Mr. Heath will recognise from this that despite his efforts nothing has changed today from the stagnant pond from which anarchists seems unable to escape.  Of course, anarchists in London may have put out more flags as seen on the video on the electrician's demo, but that is not news.  What would have been news would have been if like Tameside Trade Union Council they had been in the forefront of the campaign against the blacklist moving motions to the TUC, manning lonely picket lines in the early hours since 2003, in the DAF dispute or at the Manchester Royal Infirmary in 2009.  If Mr. Harrison is saying the anarchists are a kind of rent-a-mob available on street demos well that is part of the problem, because despite all the talk of organisating they don't seem to have the initiative to build serious enterprises themselves apart from bookfairs.  Now because of narrow-mindedness of some anarchists even bookfairs are becoming a problem for the anarchists to organise.

What Mr. Heath failed to grasp when he considered the Roberts Arundel strike (in his quote from Freedom above) was that the lesson from that strike was that the Manchester anarchists in 1967 failed to engage with the workers in dispute because they were afraid of real workers at the factory gate.  They didn't know how to address a real worker then, and they still have problems today.  Even in the run up to the campaign against the blacklist in the naughties people like Nick Heath's mate Mike Ballard, a former housing manager at Manchester City Council, was describing the Manchester electricians as not being involved in class struggle because they were taking 'individualuist'  actions by setting up pickets rather than collectivist actions.  Mr. Ballard came up with that claim at a meeting of the NAN in Burnley, of course it was before the Information Commissioner made his successful raid on Ian Kerr's office in 2009, and before Kerr pleaded guilty for keeping an illegal data-base at his trial at Knutsford Crown Court.

Abstract Anarchists & the ethnographic approach

The folly of the mechanistic managerialist approach of both Mr. Heath and Mr. Ballard is evident given that the subsequent development of the struggle of the 'Boys on the Blacklist' in Manchester, which Tameside TUC has been in the forefront of since 2003: had this handful of electricians often acting in opposition to the official union, using their own initiative not engaged in a series of small pickets around Manchester after 2003, the office of the Consulting Association, managed by Ian Kerr, would never have been raided by the Information Commissioner in  Droitwich Spa in 2009.  Consequently, the blacklist with over 3,000 names of building workers would never have been exposed.

In the mid-1970s, the criminologist Ian Smith and other anarchists used to talk about the contrast between the 'sectarian syndicalists' and 'shop-floor syndicalists' in the ASA,  Now we have very opportunistic 'abstract anarchists' like Mr. Heath and Mr. Ballard to contrast with more ethnographic approaches of others anxious to listen to the public.

What Nick Heath may have in mind when he envisages a future anarchist organisation is something like what Ken Weller and member of SOLIDARITY, talked about when he described the influence of the British Communist Party in 1956:
'People can’t realise how big an apparatus it was.  There were the embassies, the Friendship Societies, the printshops, the front organisations, the unions; 120 were employed by the Electrical Trades Union alone.  There were all the agencies of the Soviet government, Tass [the Soviet news agency], the Moscow Narodny Bank, all these sorts of things were full of people; I mean, the Soviet Weekly alone employed a network of people who were distributing agents for the paper, and so on.'

It must have been exactly like George Orwell said in the 1930s about it paying some folk to adopt a commie position, but to accomplish that kind of body among the anarchists would require something more substantial than what Nick Health has to offer with his own small-scale Anarchist Federation (AF) with all of its one hundred members paying their fees, and with perhaps a possible trans-gender platform to stand upon with its own estimated constituency of 0.1% of the national populous.  That would in any case be a very different approach from that experienced by anarchists in the early 1960s, when anarchism was at last part of a genuine social movement; that is the peace movement and the Committee of 100.

With the 'People in the Streets', as Vernon Richards described the peace movement in Freedom in the 1960s, the anarchists had a significant role to play on Ban the Bomb demos and in the Committee of 100 sit downs.  Yet when the social struggle moved to the picket lines, trade unions and factories after the Roberts Arundel strike in 1967, where the communists had the great advantage, the Manchester anarchists had very little grasp of what was required.  Only in the struggles for shop stewards up in Oldham and Rochdale in the failing textile industry such as at Courtaulds Arrow Mill in 1972, did the anarchists of Manchester have an impact, and then again in London in the building workers' struggles, anarchists like Peter Turner had a role to play.   None-the-less, in the significant disputes of the late 1960s at Pilkington Glassworks in St Helens, Upper Clyde Shipbuilding [UCS] and in engineering sit-ins, the miners struggles in the 1970s, the anarchist influence was tiny.

*     Nick Heath leader of the Anarchist Federation.

**   Roberts Arundel strike from 1966-68 of engineering workers against dilution and cheap labour.

*** Pilkington strike in St Helens of glass-workers in the Municipal & General Workers Union [now GMB] in which the workers, frustrated by both the union and the bosses, attempted to set up an independent union.

****  Ron Marsden and Alan Barlow came to Manchester in 1964 and joined the Manchester Anarchist group [MAG], which was then meeting st that meeting in the Lord Nelson in Salford.   The MAG had been founded earlier by Graham Lee and James Pinkerton, then International Secretary of the Syndicalist Workers Federation [SWF].  Marsden from Preston, and Barlow originally from Liverpool, had recently become members of the SWF, and were hoping with the help of the Liverpudlian Vincent Johnson also of the SWF, to form a faction within the MAG and drive it in a 'class struggle' direction. 

*****   COURTAULDS INSIDE OUT:  CIS ANTI REPORT No.10.  Produced in co-operation with The Transitional Institute.
******

Toby Crowe & 'Freedom' - Comment by SPGB

 IN 2015, Christopher Draper wrote an unauthorised account running to several essays about the decline and fall of the Freedom, the anarchist newspaper, following changes brought in after 2000.  Part of Mr. Draper's critique was focused upon the then controversial recruitment to the job as Freedom editor of the then general secretary of the Socialist Party of Great Britain (SPGB), Mr. Toby Crowe.  Mr. Crowe was a primary school teacher who seemingly suffered from what for want of a better description, we might call 'the teacher's disease'.  In other words his demeanour to others was somewhat authoritarian, supercilious and pompous, and in no way suitable for the job of a Freedom editor.  Judging by the letter below from Charmian Skelton, who knew the now Revd. Toby Crowe when he was in the SPGB; Mr. Crowe appeared by nature to have a bit of a top-down attitude when he was in their organisation as well:

Who Killed 'Freedom'?

(Dear Northern Voices),

I have just found the Christopher Draper article ('Who Killed Freedom' from 2015).
 Re Toby Crowe: I was – and am still - a member of the SPGB.  Toby Crowe, like his friend Robin Cox, became a new broom in the SPGB, having joined via a Guildford Branch. He was himself from Guildford and from a very affluent family.
 Robin Cox had ideas of his own, preferring ecology to class politics. Later he left the SPGB, in disagreement with its rejection of religion.
 Toby Crowe found his way to becoming the Party’s General Secretary at a time when the faction of opportunists, libertarians and Utopians were acting to split the Party. This led – on trumped-up charges – to the expulsion of some London Branches and others like myself who resigned rather than continue with the faction that had got control of the Party.
 Re Toby’s authoritarian ways as an editor: please do not blame the SPGB for this attitude of “I know best”. If, as your article says, he responded to criticism with sarcasm, that used not to be the SPGB way.
It is however a characteristic of the SWP and others influenced by Lenin!
Editorial re-drafting of articles was something I objected to when some of the faction became editors of the Socialist Standard. As a result, for some time before the ‘split’, I had stopped writing for the Standard, as had – long before me  – a number of other comrades.
 We continue to put the case for Socialism as a bottom-up not top-down movement, working democratically for a world “society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the whole community”.
 While we do fundamentally disagree with Anarchism, I consider many of the old FREEDOM supporters would have found some common ground with us, even while arguing with us.
 Since the ‘split’ we have published over 100 issues of our quarterly journal Socialist Studies, and more than a dozen pamphlets, also leaflets etc.
Our website is : www.socialiststtudies.org.uk

Yours for Socialism
C Skelton

Northern Voices: Who Killed Freedom?: an unauthorised history 1.

www.northernvoicesmag.blogspot.com/2015/.../who-killed-freedom-unauthorised-history.h...

Taking Working Class Toryism seriously

by Andrew Wallace  (24/04/17)

 IN just a few weeks’ time the British working class will turn out in unprecedented numbers in order to support a right wing Conservative government, marking an apotheosis of trends in which working people of modest means have enthusiastically endorsed a party pursuing an historical agenda which would seem on the surface at least to be hostile to their interests.

However I would say that as a leftist because I have already accepted it as self-evident that a Conservative agenda is not commensurate with the interests of those at the bottom of our socio-economic hierarchy.  I have imbibed sufficient life experiences and also by way of exposure to arguments in books and articles over the years to convince me of the malevolence of their brand of free market fundamentalism.

So like many lefties I feel irked to say the least with that most heretical act of political deviancy, the perverse irrationalism of working class Toryism.  Social networks are presently going into overdrive as Corbynistas are confronted with the rude reality as many of their friends and family have the temerity to circulate a number of pugnacious right wing memes.  The echo chambers are being systemically punctured and we are being cumulatively disabused of the progressive habitats of alternative media.

And thereby hangs a dilemma for us to collectively confront, the left’s deep denial and impotence to comprehend, let alone combat, the reality of the great ‘heresy’.

‘Heresy’

Working class Toryism has a long standing history. Marx thought that the advent of universal suffrage equated with the ‘political supremacy of the working class’. 19^th century parliamentarians fretted that the Reform Acts would destroy their dominance. This of course never happened and Conservatives like Disraeli were canny in cultivating blue collar Tories.

As maverick social thinkers like Michael Collins (labelled a ‘bête noir of the liberal left’ for his ‘destructive nostalgia') have argued with increasing plausibility, the instincts and sentiments of certain traditional working class communities are often far removed from the left liberal worldview. His discussion of the costermongers of old delineates their Tory and royalist sympathies and their antipathy to anything that might constitute a bohemian socialist import.

Collins also breaks rank with liberal niceties when he talks of culture and the salience of race and the white working class. For Collins, multiculturalism has been used as a tool by a metropolitan elite to censor and marginalise the indigenous white left behind, inviting a backlash that further strengthens forces on the far right.

Powellism

Enoch Powell’s controversial Rivers of Blood speech from 1968 (described aptly by Stuart Hall’ essay as ‘A torpedo aimed at the boiler room of consensus’), was a powerful reminder of the traction and mass appeal of a right wing doyen.  Socialists of the day had no choice but to acknowledge Powell’s formidable appeal to many workers at this time, particularly when organised labour in the form of the dockers and building workers marched in his support.  As the International Socialists (forerunners of the Socialist Workers Party) conceded: The ready response to his speech has revealed the prevalence of racialist ideas among workers, inculcated by centuries of capitalism and imperialism

From Ragged Trousered bankruptcy to Vanguardism

Robert Tressell’s famous novel, The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists, is essentially an extended Socratic dialogue in the form of a novel, as the main protagonist, Frank Owen, engages with the congenital working class conservatism of his work colleagues.  The novel is actually a useful reminder as to socialism’s problematic nature with its ostensible working class base.  Owen has to go to great lengths to proselytise for the superior virtues and rationalism of socialism.  Owen’s fellow workers are highly resistant to left wing ideas and generally happy to acquiesce in the status quo.  This is surely a salutary reminder that such ideas are far from having a privileged locus and position in working class communities, there is no spontaneity or easy populist reception for socialism.  

On the contrary, socialism is now seen as a didactic radical import.  Without the hoped for organic growth of working class left wing movements, this would have to be remedied by vanguardism, thereby negating one of the original premises of socialist thought, that working class emancipation had to be the work of the working class themselves. Unfortunately as the unfolding of history goes, that innovation didn’t work out particularly world.

Acknowledging the reality of a rightist working class

We urgently need to understand the limitations of conventional leftism and the elephant in the room – how the working classes have defected on mass to the right.  There will be lots of heads banging against walls come June 9^th, but as I have argued here, this is not a new problem.   Each generation have to partake of this bitter fruit.  However we are still compounded by our collective delusions and failure to understand the reality on the ground.

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.

Charlie Pottin's Comment on the historic takeover of the NSSN

CHARLIE Pottin's comment below on the Socialist Party coup inside the National Shop Stewards Network [NSSN] in 2011, that resulted in the departure of the syndicalists and independent socialists 19th, February 2011.  It now seems that the results of this historic takeover by the Socialist Party has ultimately led to the folly of the the Grangemouth massacre of trade union rights in which the NSSN has ended up on the losing side and which may have lasting detrimental consequences for the British trade union movement:

Charlie Pottinssaid...

I don't know about all 89 who voted against the SP resolution reconvening at the pub, I was a delegate from Brent TUC and voted against (as mandated) but didn't know about the meeting afterwards so didn't attend.
Remembering how the SP walked out of the Socialist Alliance when the SWP got a majority, I found it ironic that they charged others with wanting to take their ball away when they didn't like a decision. I was also amused to hear an SP member in Unison complain that the SWP and others had backed a "Labour Party supporter" in preference to him in union elections, when exactly the same charge could be levelled at the SP members in my own union, Unite, who voted for Len McCluskey rather than Jerry Hicks. I remarked on this to Jerry when I saw him later in the meeting, I think he too had found it amusing.
Anyway, the SP's move seems to have gone as I anticipated, despite their success in mobilising an overwhelming vote majority, they are left holding a hollow victory. Instead of creating a unified anti-cuts movement under their leadership they have succeeded in splitting the National Shop Stewards Network.
It will be ironic if the SWP who were the main butts of their denunciations are the only ones to stay. And if after such fierce denunciation they can try to erect some facade of unity for the Trade Union and Socialist Coalition (assuming that's still on).
Meanwhile back on the cuts front I am sure a united movement is emerging in each locality, usually centred on trades councils and community campaigners, and from what I can see, SP members and SWPers alike are like the rest of us, being drawn into working class activity without worrying about the empire-building rivalry which pre-occupies leaders of sects.

Saturday, 19 February 2011 17:08:00 GMT

Oh, What A Blow That Plegate Policeman Gave Me!

Police Federation More Fearsome than the TUC

THE Northern Voices Blog has tried to show that the police, spearheaded by the Police Federation, often operate as an elite interest group rather like a trade union or masonic order.  The part played by the Police Federation in the 'Plebgate' saga has been a lovely illustration of what goes on among the circulation of elites in British politics.  The coppers concerned about cuts in their profession tried to show in the Mitchell plebgate affair that they could inflict pain upon the government, and they have shown in that case and in the way they seemed to hold back during the town centre riots of 2011 that they can inflict damage and remind the politicians of their worth.  As Private Eye often reminds us most politicians are nervous of taking on the police because many politicians have skeletons in their cupboards which the police can use against them.  

The problem in this case is that the Police Federation has broken the fundamental rule 'don't get caught'.   Mr Mitchell took the precaution of using a tape recorder to keep a record of his conversations with the three distinguished representatives of the Police Federation, and now he has them 'bang to rights'.  

 

Because the Socialist World Web (Fourth International) has below produced an intellengent and well considered report on the 'Plebgate' case and the Police Federation, and the infantile nature of some parties on the British left such as the SWP, I believe it needs wider circulation through our  NV Blog: 

NONE were more enthusiastic at the outbreak of this “anti-toff” populism than the pseudo-left, with the Socialist Workers Party presenting Mitchell’s resignation as a triumph.

In fact, the entire affair was a set-up. Moreover, the exposure of this set-up has owed nothing to any official investigation, as the parliamentary parties fell over themselves to assuage the police.

It was a Channel 4 Dispatches in December that showed that CCTV footage from Downing Street did not support the police version of events, and that the “eye-witness statement” turned out to be from a police officer from the same Metropolitan Police unit as the diplomatic protection squad, who was not even in London at the time.

Only then, and with great reluctance, was it finally agreed that there should be a further investigation into the events.

According to the Sunday Times, a whistle-blower from within the Metropolitan Police confirmed that a conspiracy was hatched among police officers to frame up Mitchell, which included fabricating evidence. At the time, the Police Federation was running a high-level public campaign insisting that government austerity must not be applied to the police, who should be ring-fenced from the cuts taking place elsewhere in the public sector. The attack on Mitchell was intended as a demonstration to the government of police power and the political damage it could cause.

One year on, evidence of a police conspiracy continues to go unpunished. A police-led investigation into the three officers involved in the October 12 meeting has decided no disciplinary measures will be taken. The inquiry by West Mercia police concluded that while the public statements made by the three officers after the meeting could be seen as “ambiguous or misleading”, they did not deliberately lie so there is no case to answer.

This is despite Mitchell having made a secret tape of the discussions—the transcript of which is now available—that makes clear that they did lie about the content of the discussion.
This transparent whitewash has occasioned a protest by the usually compliant Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC). The IPCC has covered over numerous instances of police abuse, including murder. As is usual, the IPCC had been content to allow the police force to investigate itself over the Mitchell affair, choosing only to “supervise” the West Mercia inquiry.

A statement by IPCC Deputy Chairwoman Deborah Glass challenged the police decision, stating that the meeting raised an “issue of honesty and integrity, not merely naive or poor professional judgment.”

“In my view, the evidence is such that a panel should determine whether the three officers gave a false account of the meeting in a deliberate attempt to support their MPS colleague and discredit Mr Mitchell, in pursuit of a wider agenda”, she wrote.

The response of Head of the Association of Chief Police Officers Hugh Orde was to demand the abolition of the IPCC.

It has now been revealed by the IPCC that the conclusions of the West Mercia inquiry were watered down, reportedly after the intervention of senior police chiefs. In a letter, Glass stated that the first report submitted to the IPCC in July concluded “that there was a case to answer for misconduct, although their final report, submitted in August, did not.”

Despite the furore, the only action that is being proposed is that the police representatives involved should apologise to Mitchell.

As to the events of September 19, 2012, although eight people have so far been arrested, including five serving police officers, the Crown Prosecution Service has yet to decide on the central allegation of a conspiracy to depose Mitchell.

Nor are there any answers as to who leaked information to The Sun and the Daily Telegraph, or who organised “witnesses” to make lying accounts.

“Plebgate” does more than prove that nothing has changed following the exposure of criminal activity—involving bribery and corruption—between police and the Murdoch press as was revealed in the News of the World phone-hacking scandal. The scandal testifies to the enormous powers accrued by the police over the last decades.

The assault on democratic rights under the guise of the “war on terror” and preserving “law and order” means the police are ever more nakedly a law unto themselves.  Empowered to mete out punishment and abuse against workers and youth as a matter of routine, free from any accountability, they felt no compunction against the set-up of a serving MP.  Many others lower down the social hierarchy suffer far worse fates than the career destruction—including being beaten and murdered—at the hands of this wholly corrupt and purposefully unaccountable mechanism of state repression.
From Socialist World Web (Fourth International)

Manchester Peoples Assembly- A Stage Managed Spectacle.

LAST night a packed Central Methodist Hall Manchester was subjected to a centrally controlled politi cal rally and manifestly failed to live up to its billing as a Peoples Assembly.    It was completely regimented by an authoritarian chair on a raised platform and sttod in stark contrast to all the popular assemblies organised by Occupy Manchester.    The so  called open mike was little more than a charade with some speakers cut short by the chair and others not given an oppurtunity to speak.    The Assembly was esssentially an anti-Tory rally in which 2 warm up speakers preceded the  celebrity turns Mark Steel, the comedian and Owen Jones, author and Labour Party Member.    Marks performance was a typical comedic rant which went down well but was short on any real analysis and alternatve vision.    Jones on the other hand played the straight man and delivered a script which would not have been out of place at a Labour Party Conference.    A plethora of Tory bashing but bereft of any critique of Miliband's Labour policies and in my view a disappointing speech.    What was lacking throughout the night was a virtual complete absence of any internationalist perspective and an obsession with national politics.    This failure to recognise the significance of the global and transnational nature of capitalism was glaringly obvious.   All an all a missed oportunity to build a genuine alternative to austerity and global capital.    But what else could one expect from such a gathering in which Counterfire the Trotskyist split from the Socialist Workers Party seemed to have a preponderant influence with their popular front policies of building alliances with the Labour left. 

Nick Clegg, Nick Heath, SWP: Crisis Cover-ups!

The Strange Death of the English Liberal-Left

THE news of the travails of Nick Clegg, as he tries to explain how got into mess of 'knowing', but not being 'aware of specific complaints' of inappropriate behaviour by a senior Liberal Democrat, Lord Rennard, towards a number of women dating back to 2008, comes on the back of the other problems and allegations regarding the late Liberal MP for Rochdale, Sir Cyril Smith.  The scandals of a sexual nature have tended to attach themselves to the Liberals and Tories over the years (one thinks of the Profumo Affair in 1963), while it has been pointed out that the Labour Party has more in the way of financial scandals.

Now the Metropolitan police are to interview Lib Dem officials to talk about if a crime has been committed in connection with the claims of sexual harassment against the ex-party chief executive Lord Rennard.  The Daily Telegraph has reported that one of the accusers of Lord Rennard, Helen Jardine-Brown, a former boss of fund raising in the party, who made an complaint 4-years ago, was paid a £50,000 settlement by her employers accompanied with a gagging clause conditional on her silence.  Recently, Lib Dem peer Baroness Hussein-Ece told the Daily Mail, that there were similarities to the Jimmy Savile situation. 'There aren't sufficient checks and balances in place,' she said.

In The Guardian, 27th, Feb. 2013, Simon Danczuk, the Labour MP for Rochdale, who first raised concerns in parliament in November about Cyril Smith's activities, said that there is a pattern whenever allegations of sexual abuse emerge inside the Lib Dems.   He added:  'They bury their heads in the sand and claim to know nothing,' he said.  'For the sake of Rochdale victims, Clegg has to stop stonewalling and now come clean on what his party knew about the sexual abuse carried out by Cyril Smith.'   Now there is further evidence from the police files that Cyril Smith tried to meddle with the police probe according to Simon Danczuk.
 
In January, another left of centre party, the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), was engulfed in allegations of rape and sought to resolve the matter through what some of their media critics have described as a 'socialist sharia court' cover-up to investigate rape accusations against a senior member instead of reporting them to the police.  The reasoning of the SWP leadership, outline by a member, was that as they had 'no faith in the bourgeois court system to deliver justice' they would engage in a bit of do-it-yourself proceedings in the spirit of the quasi-judicial.  The result seems to have been a bit of a judicial circus in the forensic investigation of the facts of the case. 

Andy Newman, a Swindon-based Labour Party member described the SWP's conduct thus: 
'It's quite clear reading their account of what's going on that they sort of see themselves as an alternative group in society that is not part of mainstream society... they think someone couldn't or shouldn't go to the police because it would damage the party.' 
Mr. Newman, it seems, likens the SWP's disciplinary hearing to an extrajudicial 'Sharia' system or the much criticised investigations by the Roman Catholic Church into clerical abuse that by-passed reporting allegations to the authorities. 

The minutes of the SWP's disciplinary committee show that allegations were put against a 'Comrade Delta', a senior member on the party's central committee.  These accusations were made by an unnamed female member of the party, who says she was assaulted over a 6-month period between 2008 and 2009.  The minutes show that she did not want to go to the police.  The disciplinary committee cleared 'Comrade Delta', with six out of seven members of the committee supporting his story of what happened.  But when the case was later put to party members, the disciplinary committee's decision was only accepted by 231 votes to 209 votes. 

In his resignation letter, the SWP journalist Tim Walker wrote: 
'I thought that they took the case seriously, this was not a jury of his peers, but a jury of his mates.' 
A friend of the female complainant, who was not allowed to attend the disciplinary hearing, said that she felt betrayed by the party, and another said that the woman thought, naively, that 'if she put in a complaint to the party it would be dealt with in line with the party's politics and our proud tradition on women's liberation... sadly her experiences were quite the opposite.'

The Independent newspaper has contacted the SWP's head office for a comment on the allegations but got no reply.  The SWP was formed in 1977 out of the International Socialists, it considers itself a 'revolutionary party' in the tradition of the Russian politician Leon Trotsky.

Beyond the realms of the Lib Dems and the SWP, another left-wing tendency is now dealing with a dilemma of a more political nature.  On the anarchist left censorship and restraints of freedom of expression are considered an even greater sin than sexual deviation.  Recently a major row has brewed up among anarchists and their fellow-travellers about attempts to censor the northern anarchists in the Northern Anarchist Network and to put the publication Northern Voices out of business.  Bookshop managers who stock Northern Voices have been approached  menacingly, book-stalls at Bookfairs have been overturned, and the printers of Northern Voices have been telephoned, and on one occasion a couple of years ago threatened with a solicitor.  The leftist group that is now embroiled in this embarrassing political dilemma is the British Anarchist Federation (AF), some of whose members have been involved in political bullying, blacklisting and feeble-minded violence aimed at the censorship and control of the publication Northern Voices, that culminated last December in Barry Woodling being herded out of a Manchester bookfair and forced to climb down a fire-escape. In the 20th Century, the two social movements that harassed shopkeepers to distraction were the mafia in the USA and the German national socialists, but now the perverse anarchists of the AF seem to have taken a leaf out of their book.

Interestingly, Rudolf Rocker and Noam Chomsky, both distinguish libertarian/ anarchist social thinkers, have defined the intellectual origins of anarchism as lying in the two strands of progressive thinking coming out of the Enlightenment: a socialist strand on the one hand and a liberal strand on the other. The historian David Goodway in his book 'Anarchist Seeds Beneath the Snow' (First published 2006 and now revised & expanded by PM Press in paperback in 2012 and to be reviewed by Derek Pattison in the forthcoming issue of Northern Voices) argued:
'A fruitful approach to understanding anarchism is to recognize its thoroughly socialist critique of capitalism, while emphasizing that this has been combined with a liberal critique of socialism, anarchists being united with liberals in their advocacy of autonomous associations and the freedom of the individual and even exceeding them in their opposition to statism.' 
This split personality of anarchism allows in certain shallow personalities who operate a form of secretive and conspiratorial politics; it is hard for example to decide if the political body that describes itself as the Anarchist Federation has an authentic voice or face. The only AF individual I'm aware of connected with it for sure, is one of its founders Nick Heath, a retired London librarian, who now works in the bookshop of Freedom Press on Wednesday afternoons and successful got the bookshop manager to take NV13 off the shelf last August.  It was Heath, who like Cyril Smith with the police, successfully sought to bully the independent anarchist publication Freedom not to publish material about the attacks involving his AF organisation on Northern Voices and others.  Others in AF are most often known only by their first-names or pseudo-names such 'Sally', 'Andy of London AF', 'Claire of Nottingham AF' and 'Alex the National Secretary of AF', there are also a number of strange miscellaneous AF groupies such as the shy one who calls himself 'Spikymike' and another called Ron Marsden from Didsbury. But no-one from the Anarchist Federation has yet made any official statement or justification for the crazy conduct of their members: indeed one must doubt the existence of the AF as a serious political entity.

The silliness with which these AF people and  the way this rag-tag-and-bobtail 'anarchist' army have performed, has been such that some respectable anarchists have sought to try to pretend that nothing has happened. But to ignore these acts, or just to dismiss these people as 'fools', or to play the Pontius Pilate is to risk falling into the trap that the Liberal Nick Clegg and the socialist SWP is now facing.  All these cases suggest is that the 'left' in British politics, whether Liberal, Socialist or anarchist, is suffering from a deep-seated corruption and lack of serious purpose; Simon Danczuk from Rochdale with his Cyril Smith revelations, Andy Newman from Swindon in highlighting the SWP's misdemeanours, and Barry Woodling in affirming the rights of a free press, are all fighting on the side of political decency.  As Simon Danczuk says of the Lib Dems  and Cyril Smith; burying 'their heads in the sand' may be a pattern but it is certainly not a solution.
_________________________________________________________

There are still a few copies of the printed version of NORTHERN VOICES No.13, available for sale it can be obtained as follows:

Postal subscription: £5 for the next two issues (post included). Cheques payable to 'Northern Voices' at c/o 52, Todmorden Road, Burnley, Lancashire BB10 4AH. 

Tel.: 0161 793 5122.

email: northernvoices@hotmail.com

From Family History & Socialism with a Northern Accent to the Conspiracy Against the Person's Act

NORTHERN RADICAL HISTORY NETWORK

THE seats almost ran out at the Town Hall Tavern in Manchester last Saturday for the Northern Radical History Conference.  The attendance had a good geographical spread across the North from Cumbria in the North West to Derby and Sheffield in the South East, with Leeds, York, Huddersfield, Liverpool and Shropshire in between, not to mention Greater Manchester and Salford:  no-one came from Northumbria alas, unless we count Martin who is in exile from Durham.  There was a good mix of political tendencies including the SWP, the Labour Party as well as anarchists and libertarians , and a quarter of those present were women.  People sent in over a dozen apologies for none attendance.

As Steve Higginson from Liverpool, who was down to speak on 'Writing on the Wall', had been called to London on union business his spot was filled by Martin Bashford doing an item entitled 'Can Family History be Radical?'  Martin claimed that this kind of history could represent 'history from below'.  He said that from the 1950s there had been an evolution of family history alongside that of radical history and he referred to Raphael Samuel as hitting on the idea of studying family history and oral history.  Martin gave an example of Louise Rawe's study of the 'Match Girl's Strike' as an example of family history and likened it to investigative journalism.

Paul Salveson, as a well known northern historian living in Golcar near Huddersfield, argued that there was a distinctive Northern Socialism which, unlike the London socialists, was less influenced by Marx and more  by John Ruskin.  Paul said that Northern Socialism owed more to Carlyle, Robert Blatchford, Walt Whitman, Thoreau, Edward Carpenter, the Bolton lad Alan Clarke as well as Ruskin, and he insisted that socialism up here had a more environmental content.

The star turn of the day was Karen Springer (Derby People's History Group) speaking on 'The Alice Wheeldon Case'.  This strange First World War case, which seems to have slipped off the political and historical radar, involves a woman of working class origins, Alice Wheeldon, who became a radical and whose family living at 12, Pear Tree Road, Derby, sheltered conscientious objectors in 1916.  This ultimately led to her and her kids becoming of interest to both MI5 and the Russian KVD.  Alice was ultimately charged under the Conspiracy Against the Person's Act in 1916 and sentenced to a term of imprisonment.  This followed a trial involving witnesses like the 'amateur spy', Alex Gordon, who couldn't 'For Reasons of State' be cross-examined by the defence.  The prosecution had alleged Alice Wheeldon had acquired a quantity of poison with the intention of assassinating David Lloyd George, the then Prime Minister.  She was released from prison in late 1918 and died in early 1919.

The Strange Suicide of 'Stop the War'

'SUICIDE is Painless' was on a movie soundtrack in the 1970s, but last Monday (16th May) a strange event reportedly took place when the rampant revolutionaries of the Stop the War campaign were joined on the streets of London by a Libyan band of green flag waving supporters of Gadaffi; all calling for an end to the NATO backed 'No fly zone' over Libya. And the cry goes up 'Hands off Libya's Oil', from the agents of Gadaffi and the British Left alike; as a small dissident contingent of Libyan rebel protesters from the large Libyan community in Manchester joined by the well-known Manchester anarchist, John-the-Hat, heckled them in Whitehall.

Seldom since communists and Sir Oswald Mosley's blackshirts joined the same demonstration to protest at the time of the Edward VIII abdication has anything so odd happened. It was certainly a rum do last week seeing the stalwarts of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and neo-communists rubbing shoulders with Gadaffi's agents and followers. Stranger things happened in 1930s Germany of course, when the German Communists, on instructions from Moscow, supported a National Socialist (Nazi) plebiscite against the Social Democrat government of Prussia. According to the Italian novelist, Ignazio Silone, who wrote: 'On that occasion Communist groups were to be seen in harmonious unison with storm-troopers, forming "speaking choirs" in the courtyards of the big blocks of workers' flats and in the streets, urging the electors to vote against the Social Democrat government.'

Are we about to see a repeat of the folly of 1930s communism committed by the British Left? Are we witnessing the decline and fall of serious left-wing politics under what passes for British socialism? Are we seeing the strange suicide of 'Stop the War' as its members join hands with Gadaffi's pals?

What was reported to have happened in London on last Monday's 'Stop the War' demo is extraordinary but it is symptomatic of a movement that appears to have outlived its mission. Admittedly our source is from the Libyan rebel supporters in Manchester but there is a ring of truth in all this because the position of 'Stop the War', and much of the British Left, is objectively pro-Gadaffi.

National Shop Stewards Network:

  Resigning in slow motion!

THE clock is ticking, and with the next steering committee of the National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN) called by the national committee overwhelmingly dominated by the Socialist Party under secretary, Linda Taaffe, scheduled for next Sunday, some NSSN dissidents are certainly taking their time at formally handing in their resignations. Formal resignations are now into double figures on the steering committee of 60+, but probably less than one would expect at this stage given the level of feeling among the Socialist Party's opponents on the steering committee after the NSSN conference on 22nd January, at which it was generally agreed that the Socialist Party pocketed the ball.  The anarchist fortnightly, FREEDOM last week claimed that 'the majority of NSSN/Shop Steward Network national officers - all of those not in the Socialist Party - resigned their positions.'  The officers may have resigned their posts but as yet not all non-Socialist Party members of the NSSN steering committee have resigned and the Socialist Workers' Party (SWP) members have said that they will stay in until at least till next Sunday's meeting before making a final decision.

At the time of this post it may be that not all the syndicalists and anarcho-syndicalists have resigned. From those who have resigned, including Dave Chapple (Chair), George Binette (Treasurer), Bob Archer (Publicity), Becca Kilpatrick (NSSN Affiliation's Officer) Pete Firmin, Brian Bamford, Keir Lawson, Stu Melvin, Glyn Harries, Emy Castlelao, Jamie Beamont, Chris Leary, Helen Steel, Gerry Downing, a statement is expected shortly.

Freedom in its report said: '(Those) 89 who voted against the (Socialist Party) walked out of the meeting and reconvened in a nearby pub where discussions were held on the next step, deciding unanimously to continue the work of trade union activists' solidarity on an organised national basis, with syndicalists, rightly, insisting that any new network would never again fall under the leadership of a single political party.' 
In fact, there may have been more than 89 at this post-conference meeting because some at the conference didn't have delegate status and were present as observers. Some of the syndicalists met in Birmingham two weeks ago to consider the position and it is expected that a general meeting of all opponents of the Socialist Party will be pondering the options in the near future.

Myth of General Strike

Syndicalist Bedfellows Seduced

YESTERDAY the Global Edition of the New York Times ran a story about last month's general strike in Spain entitled 'For Spanish labor, a dance of discontent'. The general tenor of this report tended to support the sceptical position taken by the syndicalists at the National Shop Stewards' Network (NSSN) steering committee meeting last weekend in London, when they challenged the proposal put by the Socialist Workers' Party members on this committee to work for a 24-hour general strike. This report says the Spanish 'general strike' was according to the analysts 'a well-choreographed dance in which unions could show their discontent with the measures (of the Spanish Government) without significantly damaging their natural ally, the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, whose popularity is at its weakest point since being elected.' I think that the argument of the British syndicalists to these types of 'general strikes' is that at worst they risk bringing the weapon of the general strike into disrepute in the eyes of the working class, and, at best, are a safety valve weakening serious social unrest. They are not like the British Poll Tax Riot, sometimes referred to over here these days by militants on the left, which was unpredictable and seriously shook the regime but they are a kind of fancy shadow boxing and the leaders of the NSSN should understand this. The vain hope expressed by the SWP mover of the motion in London that he wished that Britain was like Spain and had had six 'general strikes' since 1979, shows the mindless misunderstanding of some on the British left of Spanish politics because, in a way, last month's Spanish general strike demonstrated the impotence of the Spanish trade union movement.

Indeed, most accounts claim that the Spanish strike was not a 'rousing success' and in interviews given after the strike commentators note a certain curious 'concord in which the unions declared victory but could not point to specific concessions they expected to win from the government - while the Spanish labor minister praised the union's bargaining skills'. The Spanish Government measures have cut severance pay for fired workers and made it easier for companies to put workers on less hours in response to temporary drops in demand. There has been a reduction in the collective bargaining power of the unions as well. The unions also oppose the threat in the Socialist Government's proposed budget to raise the pension age from 65 to 67.

The Spanish 'general strike' was called on the 29th, September to co-ordinate with the other European demonstrations but it seemed to turn into pockets of unrest and protest across the continent and didn't have the impact of the Greek struggles earlier in the year. Nor are the Spanish workers united in their struggles, our sources inform us that in Madrid there were three separate demonstrations during the 'general strike': one by the main unions - the UGT and Workers' Commissions; one by the anarchist CNT; and another by the anarcho-syndicalist CGT. But Spain still has 20% unemployment according to the official statistics, though these figures do not take account of the normally thriving black economy in Spain; hence, the Socialist Government is in a weak position and a poll last week in the newspaper El Pais showed the Socialists trialing the conservative Popular Party by 15%.

The problem is that the British left is so aware of its own weakness that it feels a necessity to play-up the events in Spain or Greece to create for itself an ideal type example to aim to remedy our own situation, but very often they not comparing like-with-like and are usually using foreign appearances to overlook and escape from the very real nature of our own situation. In the end on the left we are often seduced by our own slogans and apparently exotic foreign events, and things like the myth of the general strike; which requires more thought and consideration than the SWP proposal offered us at last weekend's NSSN steering committee meeting.

UPDATE: this post is now attracting responses from SWP members, whose comments can be read after the full post here. Click here to read SWP supporter Geoff Brown's post on his blog.

Syndicalists Speak at Right to Work Rally

Manchester is a city with one cathedral; two serious socialist parties - the Socialist Workers' Party and the Socialist Party; three universities - Manchester, Manchester Metropolitan and Salford University; a handful of veteran anarchist adherents to the Solidarity Federation, the Anarchist Federation and the Northern Anarchist Network; not to mention umpteen local anarcho-climate activists. So many worthy, well meaning people, it is the ideal spot to stage a Right to Work rally like that held last weekend on Oldham Street, Manchester.

Some 600 folk gathered in 'resistance & solidarity' to protect us from all manner of wickedness in this world. A Rag-Bag Rally of remarkable pretension and proportions endeavouring to gee-up those of us who're still either very young, ideologically drunk or incurably naive. A Conference 'of Resistance & Solidarity': proclaiming 'The Only Solution is Revolution' with minor celebrities on the platform and undergraduates in the audience all loaded with more than a little vain expectations.

Jerry Hicks, unemployed since he was sacked 4 years ago, ran a workshop labelled 'Stopping the Jobs Massacre' which might help him advance his campaign for the General Secretary's job in our biggest trade union: Unite the Union. Will he get it? If he does will he change the union or will the union change him? We must wait and see. In the meantime Jerry offers us a few syndicalist amendments to the status quo: 'all union officers must be elected'; 'the union must serve the members not the other way round'; 'union leaders must lead from the front, as I did on the Staythorpe power station picket last year, when the police broke my leg' or 'the solution is workers' control and revolution'. Stirring stuff delivered in a strained, strangled, shouting bellow to a roomful of about 30. Colin Trousdale, a Manchester electrician and typical English syndicalist, spoke about the blacklist in the building trade and the way the Unite union bosses were dragging their feet rather than fighting the victimisations.

The SWP bosses, who were running the rally, don't much like Jerry Hicks since he left their party - hence this workshop was in the equivalent of outer-Mongolia at the Mechanics Institute, well away from the main conference venue on Oldham Street. Because of this I missed the 7 minute speech delivered by Dave Chapple, who alongside Dave Douglass, is probably the most important revolutionary syndicalist in the country. Dave Chapple who was on the platform as President of the National Shop Stewards' Network and according to reports hammered home an attacked on ballot box politics referring to Wobblies of the American IWW like Bill Heywood, and dismissing the left-wing giddiness associated with the coming General Election; telling the Conference that these days he only bothered to vote in union elections.

The rally produced a 'wish-list' and voted to set up a 'Rank & File' movement, which will stand in contrast to the NSSN that is based in the existing unions. In the end it is likely that the 'rank & file' project will render itself to be little more than a fart in a bottle. The SWP organisers are good at rallies but not so clever when it comes to following through: soon the novelty will wear off and they will be off on some other campaign or venture. We should note the headline in the current Socialist Worker: 'Be Part of the New Wave of Resistance'. Well it's part of the DNA of the British left to be always 'in resistance' and never to make serious practical proposals for change. The Government and the bosses set the agenda and the trade unions and the left react to it as best they can. This more than anything displays the primitive and immature [if not feeble-minded] state we are in as a political movement.