Parliament Gets Vote on Brexit!

THE Supreme Court has ruled today that Parliament must vote on whether the government can start the Brexit process.

This judgement means Theresa May cannot begin talks with the EU until MPs, and peers give their backing - although this is now expected to happen in time for the government's 31 March deadline.
But crucially, the court ruled the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies did not need a say.
During the Supreme Court hearing, campaigners argued that denying the UK Parliament a vote was undemocratic and a breach of long-standing constitutional principles.

They said that triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty - getting formal exit negotiations with the EU under way - would mean overturning existing UK law, so MPs and peers should decide.

The Decision of the Supreme Court

Reading out the judgement, Supreme Court President Lord Neuberger said:
'By a majority of eight to three, the Supreme Court today rules that the government cannot trigger Article 50 without an act of Parliament authorising it to do so.' 

He added:  'Withdrawal effects a fundamental change by cutting off the source of EU law, as well as changing legal rights.  The UK's constitutional arrangements require such changes to be clearly authorised by Parliament.'

The court also rejected, unanimously, arguments that the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Northern Ireland Assembly should get to vote on Article 50 before it is triggered. 

But Nicola Sturgeon has said that the Scottish government will propose legislation allowing Holyrood to have a say in the triggering of Article 50.

The Scottish Problem?

The justices held back from insisting that the devolved administrations would have a vote or a say on the process. That was, as described by a member of Team May, the "nightmare scenario".
The Scottish National Party has said it would not try to veto Brexit, but there is no question that having a vote on Article 50 in the Holyrood Parliament could have been politically troublesome for the government. After the judgement the BBC reported that it seems like an unexploded bomb.
And second, the Supreme Court also held back from telling the government explicitly what it has to do next. The judgement is clear that it was not for the courts but for politicians to decide how to proceed next.
That means, possibly as early as tomorrow, ministers will put forward what is expected to be an extremely short piece of legislation in the hope of getting MPs to approve it, perhaps within a fortnight.

Housing, People & Regionalism in the UK

by Brian Bamford  

AT the Green Gathering in the Methodist Hall Oldham Street in Manchester, last Saturday, Dr. Roz Fox from Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), a qualitative analyst, said: 

'The city of Manchester is the fastest growing city outside of London, and there have been interim talks about the city needing 200,000 homes by 2030.'  The academic  argued that 'housing is not just about bricks and mortar, but more importantly 'about people; the local labour market; land availability and social facilities.'   

This all has now to be accomplished in an era of public service cuts and an increasingly ageing population.  

This has to happen at a time when devolution is becoming fashionable.  According to Dr. Fox, the challenges now are what type of properties are required, and most important how do with involve people in the decision-making.   

Meanwhile, last Tuesday, in Haringey civic centre councillors were heckled while debating plans to rip communities apart, and hand control to a private entity.  Aditya Chakrabortty wrote about the Haringey case on Friday 20th, January 2017:  'At its heart is a programme that is among the most audacious I've ever seen.  Haringey wants to privatise huge swaths of public property: family homes, school buildings, its biggest library.  All of it will be stuck in a private fund worth £2bn.'  The fear is that areas of north Manchester between Bury, Rochdale and Oldham something rather similar is in danger of happening as armies of protesters gather to protect what they perceive as the threat to the Green Belt. 
In an article about anti-social behavior in the North East, Neil Tweedie in the Mail on Saturday last November, claimed that 'Grimsby is a long way from the oak-paneled conference rooms of the government departments in Whitehall...' but that 'Cameron's project to "cure" Broken Britain (started in 2011) ' had cost '£450m' and it had 'achieved nothing-apart from exposing Whitehall incompetence, deceitful councils, the vanity of politicians... and how they squander YOUR money'.

Regions of the UK

In England, the culture of centralism dominates in a strange way of a kind of surburban relationship and attachment to London.  In 1905, the novelist Henry James declared:  'All England is in suburban relation (to London).'  
Since the beginning of the 20th Century the south and particularly London have come to dominate the English economy and culture.  The historian, Tristram Hunt, in concluding his book 'Building Jerusalem' (2004) wrote:  'The corporate and financial stampede southward was quickly followed by the political parties, the media (including the Manchester Guardian), the professional establishment (from lawyers to doctors to accountants to architects), the cultural elite, even the representatives of organised labour.' 
Centralisation is the problem confronting this country.  One or two comments last week, on this NV Blog suggested that DevoManc, as it is now being presented, is a top-down phenomena.  
The regions and localities of the England, unlike Scotland, lack the self-confidence and imagination required to promote a bold self-identity that could compare with provinces in France or the regionalism on the Spanish peninsular.  Notions of federalism seem alien in the English regions. 
I think that in Northern Voices' we have identified a broad North-South dichotomy, but the various particular regions lack confidence and up to now have had a provincial insecurity in relation to the metropolis that is London. 
This has not always been the case, Tristram Hunt again in 'Building Jerusalem' wrote:  'In the Victorian era, that metropolitan imperialism appeared out-dated as the great northern civilisations established themselves as core components of the cultural firmament.' 
Neither the Green Gathering last Saturday nor the Andy Burnham Manifesto Meeting last Thursday tackled this problem of building an awareness of regional identity, although in the workshops of the Burnham meeting it was asked 'How do we change mind-sets?'.

The Future of Federalism in the UK?

In France the French Revolution finished off the work of Louis XIV and gave France a powerful highly centralised state.  In Spain the Liberal Revolution imitated this development.  Then in both countries came a reaction to this centralisation with movements for greater local and municipal liberty. 
In France this reaction was best expressed by Pierre Joseph Proudhon, who put forward those ideas which, he believed, the French Revolution had come into existence to fulfil, but which had been diverted by the ruthless political action of the Jacobins. 
In Spain, with its intense provincial feelings and local patriotisms, one would have expected the movement towards decentralisation to be even greater,but because of the consequences for Spain after the Napoleonic Wars and the fact that Carlism drew into its ranks many of the forces of resistance to Liberal centralism, these feelings didn't for some time make their appearance among the parties of the Left.  Only as an result of the work of Pi y Margall, a Catalan, who knew and understood the social and political ideas of Proudhon, did he grasp that these ideas best suited the aspirations of his countrymen.  It was through the efforts of Pi y Margall that the Federal movement in Spain grew in the 1860s.  
Unlike France and Spain, no such popular radical movement to express the local and regional spirit in a federalist manner has yet developed in England.  This may be because as an island we have been isolated from the continental currents which are still prevalent in Europe.  It may be because anarchism and organised regionalism, have been half-baked traditions.  Marxism, even though the Communist Party itself has never caught on in Britain, has had a wider influence in the universities than anarchism or federalism.

Unite Union Machine Moves to Crown McCluskey

LAST week, with the start of nominations for the new General Secretary of Unite the Union, the Unite bureaucracy moved swiftly to back Leonard David  McCluskey (born 23 July 1950), who has been the General secretary of Unite since 2011.  According to his Wikipedia entry he previously spent some years working on the Liverpool Docks before to becoming a full-time union official.

On the 16th January 2017, Tim Lezard in Union News reported:

'Len McCluskey has swept the board in support from officers and reps in Unite in his bid to be re-election the union’s general secretary.

'McCluskey, who is standing against Gerard Coyne and Ian Allison, has won the backing of nine out of Unite’s ten regions as well as the vast majority of officers, sectoral and regional committee chairs and executive members.' 

Meanwhile, Guido Fawkes on December 22nd, 2016 wrote on his Blog that the 'Pro-Assad agitprop rag the Morning Star has endorsed Len McCluskey for the Unite leadership.'

Guido Fawkes added:  'Their floppy-haired, Oxford-educated editor Ben Chacko explains:  “Mr McCluskey’s support and advice has been of great value to us throughout his leadership”.'

Guido reminds us that 'Chacko’s (Morning Star) paper is in line to receive a good deal more than “advice” should Red Len be re-appointed General Secretary of Britain’s wealthiest union. During McCluskey’s current tenure “support” meant thousands of full-colour Morning Star subscription mail shots sent out to Unite branches across Britain at members’ expense.'

 It seems that in one leaflet Mr. McCluskey decreed:   'There is no substitute for reading the paper but you could also take out a shareholding in the Morning Star and send a regular monthly sum to the paper’s Fighting Fund.'

McCluskey became an officer of the TGWU on Merseyside in 1979, and was its campaign organiser throughout the 1980s, during that time he supported the Militant tendency, but was not a member of it.

McCluskey was elected as the National Secretary of the TGWU General Workers Group in 1990, and moved to London to work at the union headquarters.   In 2004 he became the TGWU's national organiser for the service industries.   In 2007, he was appointed as the Assistant General Secretary for Industrial Strategy of the newly merged Unite the Union.  He defines himself as being on the left of the union, and has been given the label of "Red Len" in the British press.

In 2010, McCluskey stood for election as General Secretary of Unite to replace joint-General Secretaries Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley, who had both announced their retirement.
On 21 November 2010, it was announced that McCluskey had won the election.^[
McCluskey took office as the General Secretary on 1 January 2011.  In 2013, McCluskey announced that he would be running for re-election as General Secretary.^[6] He was re-elected in 2013 with the following results posted. The full election results of those elections are as follows:
Len McCluskey: 144,570 votes.
Jerry Hicks: 79,819 votes.
Number of ballot papers found to be invalid: 1,412.
Total number of valid votes cast: 224,389.
Turnout: 15.2 per cent.

History of mishandling the Falkirk election & disaffiliation threat.

In July 2013, McCluskey accused the Labour Party of 'picking the wrong fight' over the selection of a prospective candidate in the Falkirk constituency.  He described Labour party headquarters' handling of the matter as 'nothing short of disgraceful'.^[8]
In November 2013, McCluskey denied fresh claims that his Unite Union had tried to prevent a Labour Party investigation into alleged vote rigging in Falkirk.
In March 2015, McCluskey threatened to disaffiliate Unite from Labour and launch a new workers' party if Labour lost the 2015 General Election.
After moving to London as part of the T&GWU national operation in 1991 whilst still married, his partner Jennie Formby (née Sandle), gave birth to a child at Princess Anne Hospital in Southampton.

In 1994, McCluskey made headlines after it was revealed that he had received a subsidized loan of £90,000 to buy a house with Formby in NW10, London.  Mr. McCluskey lives with his partner Paula Lace.   In 2013, Jennie Formby was appointed Unite's political director on £75,000, replacing Steve (Stephen) Hart, who was the son of Judith Hart, Baroness Hart of South Lanark.

 Clashes in the current Election for General Secretary

McCluskey and one of the other candidates Kevin Coyne have clashed over the airwaves.  Speaking on the BBC’s Pienaar’s Politics, McCluskey accused his challenger of being a 'puppet of Labour’s hard right'.  Coyne responded, saying:

'Absolutely I am not a puppet.  The reality is I have a vision and a change agenda for our union that is about putting in back in the hand of the members and making the union focus on the issues that are important to them.'

Meanwhile, Ian Allinson in December criticised McCluskey for suggesting that workers could benefit from reforms to the free movement of people when Britain leaves the European Union.


 Princess Anne Hospital in Southampton.^[1][3][11] In 1994, McCluskey made headlines after it was revealed that he had received a subsidized loan of £90,000 to buy a house with Formby in NW10, London.^[12] McCluskey lives with his partner Paula Lace. In 2013, Jennie Formby was appointed Unite's political director on £75,000, replacing Steve (Stephen) Hart, who was the son of Judith Hart, Baroness Hart of South Lanark


TGWU General Workers Group in 1990, and moved to London to work in the union's national headquarters.^[1][3]
TGWU in Merseyside in 1979 and was its campaign organiser throughout the 1980s,^[3][5] during which he supported Militant tendency, but was not a member of it.^[1]

He

McCluskey was elected as the National Secretary of the TGWU General Workers Group in 1990, and moved to London to work in the union's national headquarters.^[1][3] In 2004 he became the TGWU's national organiser for the service industries.^[3] In 2007, he was appointed as the Assistant General Secretary for Industrial Strategy of the newly merged Unite the Union.^[3] He defines himself as being on the left of the union, and has been given the label of "Red Len" in the British press because of his involvement in Unite's dispute with British Airways.^[5]
In 2010, McCluskey stood for election as General Secretary of Unite to replace joint-General Secretaries Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley, who had both announced their retirement. On 21 November 2010, it was announced that McCluskey had won the election.^[3] Derek Simpson retired a few weeks later, in December 2010, and Tony Woodley followed shortly after that, leaving McCluskey to take office as the General Secretary on 1 January 2011.^[5] In 2013, McCluskey announced that he would be running for re-election as General Secretary.^[6] He was re-elected in 2013 with the following results posted. The full election results are as follows:
Len McCluskey: 144,570 votes.
Jerry Hicks: 79,819 votes.
Number of ballot papers found to be invalid: 1,412.
Total number of valid votes cast: 224,389.
Turnout: 15.2 per cent.

'Pro-Assad agitprop rag the Morning Star has endorsed Len McCluskey for the Unite leadership. Their floppy-haired, Oxford-educated editor Ben Chacko explains:

“Mr McCluskey’s support and advice has been of great value to us throughout his leadership.”

Guido concluded his critique:  'Len’s “support” has indeed been of “great value” to the Morning Star, least they can do is repay the favour…'

“We’re backing Len” – McCluskey sweeps board with endorsements from officers and reps

16th January 2017 Tim Lezard   News   No comments

An advert in the Morning Star, showing the nominations received by Len McCluskey

An advert in the Morning Star, showing the nominations received by Len McCluskey

An advert in the Morning Star, showing the nominations received by Len McCluskey

Len McCluskey has swept the board in support from officers and reps in Unite in his bid to be re-election the union’s general secretary.

McCluskey, who is standing against Gerard Coyne and Ian Allison, has won the backing of nine out of Unite’s ten regions as well as the vast majority of officers, sectoral and regional committee chairs and executive members.

He said: “I am deeply honoured to have received the over-whelming support of the people who give their time to build this great union and defend our members.

“Their vote of confidence in me is phenomenal.  It sends a signal to our members that despite what one of my opponents may say, this union has gone from strength to strength under my leadership.

“This sends a clear signal to Unite members that their union is stable and united, determined to deliver for them in our workplaces – and wants to stay on this course.

“I hope now that this will persuade one general secretary candidate to desist from the nonsense claims he is making about our union, assisted all too eagerly by parts of the media who are openly hostile to this movement.

“The truth about Unite is that it is proudly united, democratic, progressive and will never, as long as I lead it, ever turn its back on its members.”

Meanwhile, McCluskey and Coyne clashed yesterday over the airwaves. Speaking on the BBC’s Pienaar’s Politics, McCluskey accused his challenger of being a “puppet of Labour’s hard right”. Coyne responded, saying: “Absolutely I am not a puppet. The reality is I have a vision and a change agenda for our union that is about putting in back in the hand of the members and making the union focus on the issues that are important to them.”

Cut the Crap of a Unite Coronation!

No to elitism & top-down trade unionism!
from an Ian Allinson e-mail - headline & sub-title northern voices

THE shortened nomination period, along with the unexpected election, is a key part of how this was intended to be a coronation rather than a contest.  We've now had one week of the five weeks for nominations.
Our arguments are being very well received in workplaces and at hustings. I've posted some tips if your branch or workplace wants to organise a hustings.
Thanks to London GEMS, South Croydon Arriva bus, Tyneside Engineering, Coventry & Warwickshire Tom Mann, Bury commercial and SCA Prudhoe branches that have told me they have nominated me so far.
Six is a good start, but we'll need to up the pace if we're to be sure of being on the ballot paper.  We have to assume that the union will find ways to rule out a fair proportion of our nominations, so have to aim well above the 50.  The other candidates have lavishly funded campaign machines - we're relying on ourselves to fight for every nomination and to ensure members can decide the future of our union based on the issues, not on who has rich and powerful backers.
If you win a nomination at your meeting, please let me know right away and make sure all the paperwork is sent off accurately and promptly.  Branches can do this online, which goes directly to ERS and avoids the possibility of Unite mislaying your nomination.
Bury Commercial branch contacted local press following their nomination and got some coverage, which all helps make members aware of the campaign.  The Tom Mann branch decided to donate to the costs campaign.
Don't forget that as well as branch nominations, every workplace can also make a nomination, unless it is in a branch covering just that one workplace.  Full details of how to nominate me are here. Nominations at workplaces are just as important as branches.  They may not be able to contribute financially, but workplace meetings often involve more / different members than branch meetings.
Please let me know:

• Where and when your nominating meeting is
• If you'd like me or a representative to come and speak at your meeting or to visit your workplace - please give me as much detail as possible
• If you'd like some leaflets, how many you'd like and where to send them to

If you support the campaign, please make sure you've left your details here. Let me know what you're doing and how it's going.
This week I've posted new material on www.ian4unite.org on sexism, bullying and harassment in Unite, and on the arguments around Trident, partnership and diversification - I'm the only candidate clearly opposed to Trident. The web site also carries my campaign pledges, many of which link to articles with a more detailed explanation. These are copied below.
There's no let up in the pressure from employers and government, so we can afford no let up in our campaign. More of the same isn't good enough!

Solidarity

Ian.

www.iansunitesite.org.uk

www.leftfutures.org/2016/12/unite-general-secretary-election-who-is-ian-allinson

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38340128

https://www.facebook.com 

  https://twitter.com/IanAllinson

https://www.theguardian.com  

www.ian4unite.org

https://socialistworker.co.uk/.../Why+I+am+standing+for+Unite+leader+++Fujitsu+stri..

Ian's pledges

Communication, participation and a bottom-up union

• Champion lay member democracy and participation, don't undermine it.
• Fortnightly email bulletins direct to all activists, not filtered through officers and committees.
• Support members being able to elect the officers who represent us. Not only would this increase accountability, it would reduce the power of patronage and the climate of fear in the union.
• Tackle the non-functioning branches that deny members a voice and access to resources.
• Oppose the exclusion of community and retired members from participation in Unite structures.
• I'd keep my current wage, not the inflated General Secretary salary, to avoid giving the hostile media ammunition against us.

A stronger union, fit for the future

• Involve members, officers and staff in a major review of Unite's structures to make them fit for purpose in the 21st century. Shift resources and power away from regions to better support the vast majority of Unite workplaces that are in employers spanning multiple regions. Improve support for company and sub-sector combine committees.
• Encourage a spirit of experimentation in organising. Documents and publicise case studies of lessons from members’ organising and campaigning efforts and successes. We spend too much effort trying to reinvent the wheel.
• A flexible facility for levies for strike funds etc, not restricted to where all members are in workplace branches.
• Access to a Dispute Unit for all disputes from an early stage. All members in dispute should feel like they have a million members behind them, not be left to fend for themselves.
• Expand the lay companion scheme to involve more members (including those not in paid work) and free up officer time from casework.
• Overhaul education, which is essential for organising and changing the union's culture, in the light of funding cuts, and ensure fair treatment for our tutors.
• Build on our organising success by increasing lay member involvement.

 Equality and young members' issues in our industrial agenda, not an optional extra

• Champion workers' rights to move freely and be treated equally wherever we go. No concessions to racism or nationalism.
• Integrate our equality and young members work better into our industrial agenda.
• Tackle bullying and sexual harassment, including within our own union (also see report).

 Campaign now: backing Corbyn shouldn't mean waiting for him

• Extend Unite's support for Jeremy Corbyn, not only through Unite's role inside the Labour Party, but by grass roots campaigning and action which can win people over. Stop undermining him on key policies and calling his leadership into question.

 Fight for workers' rights, don't tail our employers' agendas

• Organise regional conferences bringing together campaigns for civil liberties and against state repression, so that our opposition to anti-union legislation stops being isolated and ineffective.
• Challenge the culture of partnership - we are not "all in it together". Post-Brexit Unite should be prioritising defence of workers' rights, not tailing employers' demands for free trade or protectionism.
• Support a million climate jobs, not costly and destructive vanity projects like Trident, HS2, Heathrow expansion and Hinkley Point. Proactively fight for diversification to protect members whose jobs will be affected by changes such as climate change, changes in defence policy and automation. Call a conference of defence workers, the defence teams from Labour and the SNP, and experts on diversification.
• Investigate the role of union officials in blacklisting members. Officially extend every assistance to the Blacklist Support Group in rooting out collusion and backdoor deals with the employers.

--

For more information on the campaign, see http://www.ian4unite.org, https://twitter.com/ian4unite and https://www.facebook.com/ian4unite/. To donate to the campaign, see https://donorbox.org/ian4unite
This message was sent to northernvoices@hotmail.com by email@ian4unite.org
To forward this message, please do not use the forward button of your email application, because this message was made specifically for you only. Instead use the forward page in our newsletter system.
If you wish you can unsubscribe from all future mailings.

Lies, damn lies and newspapers!

by Les May

TODAY, Saturday 21 January, 'The "i"’ newspaper deliberately printed a lie about Jeremy Corbyn.  How do I know it is a lie?  Because the day before they printed the truth.

On Friday the paper reported that with reference to triggering Article 50 Corbyn had said;

'It’s very clear, the referendum made a decision that Britain is to leave the EU. It wasn’t to destroy jobs or living standards or communities, but it was to leave the EU and have a different relationship in the future.  I’ve made it very clear, the Labour party accepts and respects the decision of the British people.' and ‘Asked if that meant a three-line whip to force Labour MPs into line, Mr Corbyn replied; It means Labour MPs will be asked to vote in that direction.’

Today, in the same newspaper, that had become ‘Jeremy Corbyn orders Labour MPs to vote in favour of exiting the EU.’

And it didn’t stop there.  On Friday Rob Merrick wrote in the his article ‘About five have said they will vote against Article 50 and four Shadow Cabinet members are rumoured to be considering a revolt.’  So by my reckoning that makes between five and nine who are unhappy with the policy.

By Saturday political editor Nigel Morris had discovered a ‘rebellion’ amongst Labour MPs with ‘Dozens of MPs could rebel…’ and ‘According to one report, as many as 80 could defy the leader’.  Or it could all be Morris flying a kite.

I doubt that anyone in Corbyn’s team will bother to complain.  

When a complaint about a Corbyn interview with Laura Kuenssberg shown in BBC 1’s News at Six in November 2015 was made it took 14 months to get an adjudication.  Even though the BBC Trust upheld complaints about lack of truth and lack of impartiality in the report the director of news James Harding declined to accept the censure.

The truth matters.  Printing speculation and quoting unknown sources influences what we believe, reinforces prejudices and leaves us open to manipulation.  The truth, however unpalatable to our personal prejudices, leaves us free to make our own choices.

Labour MPs saw the News at Six report, believed it to be a true account of what Corbyn had said and used it to attack him in a later meeting.  That’s why the truth matters.  The BBC trust rejected claims from the BBC that this was evidence that the report was an accurate reflection of what Corbyn had said, pointing out that this was a circular argument.  It beggars belief that anyone claiming to have integrity would try such a ploy.

In recent months every newspaper has tried to solicit the support of its readers in attacking Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. To judge from the stories they have been putting out triggering the implementation of Section 40 means an end to a ‘free press’.

Now I readily accept that a ‘free press’, that is a press free from government control, is a necessary condition for living in a liberal democracy.  That is ‘necessary’ but not ‘sufficient’.  A liberal democracy also needs a press which is ‘honest’; that is does not lie outright or by implication, ‘fair’; that is reports the activities of all the agents involved in social and political debate and ‘diverse’; that is it is not in the hands of a few proprietors and represents a wide spectrum of political views.

To put it bluntly; in spite its pretensions to be guardians of our freedoms, and holders to account of the mighty and the powerful, the British press is ‘piss poor’.  And the BBC is increasingly going that way.

In spite of what is being claimed Section 40 does not seem to be about government control of the press.  It’s about redressing the huge imbalance which exists between the people who have lies told about them in the press and the people who do the lying.

We already have draconian libel laws in this country.  But for ordinary people who have lies told about them they are just too costly to invoke.  The press has, and will always have, much deeper pockets than the rest of us.  Suing for libel, even if you have a very strong case and eventually win, is not for the faint hearted.  But look at the anti-Section 40 propaganda in the press and you will see that the little people do not figure.  

If Section 40 is implemented the judiciary is not going to allow frivolous and unreasonable cases to clog the courts.  All the press has to do to avoid falling foul of Section 40 is, a) get the facts right in the first place, and b) if a mistake is made, as it inevitably will be, print a proper correction with at least equal prominence.

Getting the facts right might mean nothing more than having more bodies in the office who have the task of checking pieces for factual accuracy and preventing speculation and opinion being passed off as fact.  Perhaps we should call them sub-editors.

For my part I mostly get my international news from Aljazeera on Freeview channel 108 and rely on the Irish press for European news.  No doubt these have there own prejudices which I have to filter out.  But Aljazeera’s news and documentary output, a bit like Heinken, reaches the parts the Beeb does not reach.   

'Fifty Shades of Grey' at Bury Unite Branch

ALLEGATIONS that 'pressure' was put on the Bury Unite Commercial Branch to nominate Len McCluskey, the current General Secretary of Unite the Union, for re-election in the forthcoming elections for Unite's top job have been rebutted by the local branch secretary Brian Bamford.   The claim was made on Twitter by one of the candidates that the presence of two Unite full-time organisers at last Monday's branch meeting was a failed attempt to influence the Bury branch to vote for Mr. McCluskey, a strong backer of Jeremy Corbyn the Labour Party leader.

The Unite union at present funds the Labour Party to the tune of many millions of pounds every year.

The row about the Bury branch being 'pressurised' to back McCluskey arose because of a Tweet on Ian Allinson's Twitter account after the branch meeting, implying that the organisers were there to influence the result.  Mr. Allinson is one of the three candidates standing for the top position of Unite General secretary. 

Since then, Mr. Bamford has insisted that 'the Bury Unite Branch blooms with binmen not shrinking violets and there is no way we could be leaned on by the union bosses'. 

The two organisers were allowed to participate in the discussion over the nomination, but not to dominate the discourse or to vote.

The organisers were permitted to speak but naturally not to vote, because the Bury Unite Branch  passionately believes in 'free speech' and 'lively debate'.

It was suggested during the discussions that the nomination of Ian Allinson to appear on the ballot paper would have the effect of 'splitting the left vote' between McCluskey and Allinson.  Gerard Coyne, who is a Unite full-time organiser in the Midlands, is the third candidate and is reputed to be a 'right-wing Blairite'.

This was contested by the branch secretary Mr. Bamford, who said that the membership should have 'the widest possible choice' between the different candidates, and he claimed that the critics of Allinson by using the 'split-vote' argument were seeking to shrink the choice before the membership.  In contrast 'we' the Unite Bury branch, wanted to 'open things up and not to narrow things down'.  Bamford claimed that even though he may possibly vote for Len McCluskey it was still vital to have someone like Ian Allinson on the ballot sheet.

To argue that there should be only two choices between 'left and right' is to create a thread-bare bipolar dichotomy of 'cowboys and Indians' or 'black and white'.  This is a thoroughly 20^th century mentality, and in essence the Bury branch was preferring to embrace the spirit of 'Fifty Shades of Grey' in their approach; what they wanted, if I am interpreting the spirit of the meeting correctly, was the broadest possible discussion, debate and openness within the realm of liberty.

Those at the meeting who took the 'split vote' view then went on to say that we should look to the established experienced of experts like Mr. McCluskey from Liverpool, a professional official with many years of in the saddle of officialdom, rather than a new boy such as a shop-floor activist like Mr. Allinson from Blackley, Manchester. 

This faith in the expertise of the office-holder is as feeble-minded as the bipolar dichotomy, and is just another mediocre left-over of the old 20^th century modernity.  It is so full of holes that the average bin-man can see through it without so much as looking up from his football results. 

The bin-men of Bradley Fold, and the others on the branch committee, eventually came to a carefully calibrated conclusion, and were in no way confused or overwhelmed by any hypothetical 'hierarchical pressures' from above.

This was demonstrated by the branch's clear unanimous vote to nominate the local Manchester lad, Ian Allinson, for the position as General Secretary of Unite the Union.  We must now await to see how many Unite members vote for him.

Green Party & Future of Housing

Future of Housing and remembering Deyika Nzeribe, Green Party Gathering

       by Manchester Green Party

Date and Time

Sat 21 January 2017

14:00 – 16:00 GMT

Add to Calendar

Location

Methodist Cental Buildings

Oldham Street

Manchester

M1 1JQ

View Map

Open to all:

JOIN us for one of our regular Green Gatherings. Due to the sudden death of our Greater Manchester Mayoral candidate, Deyika Nzeribe, the event will combine a focus on housing with a chance to remember Deyika. After some thought we felt that this event should go ahead as Deyika was passionate about providing good quality housing for all.

We will be discussing the future of housing in Manchester and Greater Manchester. as well as celebrating the life of Deyika We want to hear ideas from you.

What will happen?

There will be speakers with a question and answer session on the topic of housing

Speakers include:

Dr Roz Fox

Roz is a Lecturer at Manchester Metropolitan University where she teaches on the undergraduate Public Service degree and Masters programme in Public Administration

Roz is also the academic lead of the university wide Social Housing Innovation, Research and Enterprise (SHIRE) network that provides research, consultancy and support to housing associations and their customers across the North West and Cheshire.

Charlotte Allen

Is a member of Steady State Manchester. She helped draw up Steady State's paper ‘Housing in the Viable Economy’ which will shortly be available on our website. She is also a member of Greater Manchester Housing Action.

She trained as an architect and town planner and worked in London and Lancashire before going to Mozambique, where she lived for nearly 30 years, working in urban and rural development.

Following this there will be a conversation around the life of Deyike Nzeribe. We will talk about the projects he was involved with, what he wanted to achieve and how we can pay tribute to him.

Expect: free flowing ideas, a relaxed open atomsphere, biscuits, a chance to have conversations about housing.

Don't expect: long speeches and quizzes on obscure policy points.

Read more Read less

Andy Burnham Says 'I'll be a people's Mayor!'

by Brian Bamford

TODAY at The Albert Halls in Bolton's Victoria Square the Labour candidate for the Greater Manchester Mayor's job told those who gathered to hear his manifesto for 'A safe, inclusive and diverse Greater Manchester' that he would be a 'People's Mayor' and a 'Grass-roots Mayor'. 
Mr. Burnham declared himself in favour of 'Safer Streets' and promised to work with the Chief Constable to start recruiting new police officers that reflect the diversity of Greater Manchester.  He promised to create 'a different relationship between the State and the Voluntary sector'. 
We were told that 'Crime is on the rise' and that 'Deep inequalities remain', and that 'we have seen an increasing amount of young people sleeping on the streets'.
The Labour candidate for Mayor worried about the cost of transport and bus fares, though he never said how often he used a bus, he spoke of housing problems and it was claimed that many young people will never be able to own their own house.  It was said that pensioners were made to feel guilty for claiming state pensions.  That scapegoating was prevalent in what was called the 'blame culture' of British society were everyone knows his or her place and fears the disruption that foreigners may bring:  it was said that one Polish nurse had been abused by people who she was treating in the Bolton community, telling her to 'Get back to Poland!'
Andy asked us 'Why has Mental Health shot up the social agenda?', and suggested that the 'voluntary sector' was 'person sensitive' while the 'Statutory sector' was much less inclined to address a 'personalised approach'. 
He claimed that he had in mind a new apprenticeship system which would draw upon the good things in the traditional apprenticeship and blend it with new concepts:  saying that he had had contact with the union UCATT. 
Regarding care in the community he said that he wanted to recruit the help of the Communication Worker's Union (CWU) to get the post-men to keep an eye on old and frail people in society.  This, he claimed, would reduce the isolation and insecurity people felt.
What was wanted was 'a young-people's cabinet to advise the Mayor on all areas of policy and ensure young peoples' voices are heard'.
Then in keeping with the latest fashion, Mr Burnham stated:  'I am proud that Greater Manchester has such a thriving LGTB community, rivalling London as the LGBT capital.'
Nothing was said about the Labour councillors in Rochdale who last month voted themselves a 34% increase, though one of the Rochdale Labour councillors at the Burnham manifesto meeting quietly told me that he was not going to take the rise, and when asked what the Rochdale Council leader, Richard Farnell, was thinking of by forcing the rise through on a whipped vote he said:  'He's Big Headed and doesn't care about UKIP!'
Nothing was said about the Labour Council leader of Manchester City Council, Richard Lees, who had addressed a meeting of Voluntary Organisations on Devo-Manc at which he said he wanted to see ward and hospital closures across Manchester, including Tameside because he believed that many people are in hospital who ought not to be, and could have their needs better met elsewhere.
Fear of the threat of UKIP was ever present in the workshops.

Tolerating Danczuk in the Labour Party?

by Les May

THE report in yesterday’s Evening Standard gossip column about Simon Danczuk’s continuing suspension from the Labour party should be taken with a pinch of salt.  Again Simon is telling us about his understanding what Labour party officials had decided.  We had the same sort of story just after New Year when he told the Manchester Evening News, the Daily Mirror and the Rochdale Observer that 'Labour has "no choice" but to accept him back into the party in the new year' and 'I’ve met with chief whip Nick Brown and he says there’s no case to answer.'

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/simon-danczuks-snare-of-self-delusion.html 

Clearly the NEC members thought they did have a choice.

It suits Danczuk to have someone write he’s ‘never been on good terms with the Corbyn gang’.  It lets him pose as the innocent victim of a stitch up by Corbyn and his supporters.  And it lets him elevate himself to the status of a man of ideas by being thought of as a ‘critic’.

Now it’s certainly true that there are Corbyn supporters, probably quite a lot, who were happy to see him suspended and would like to see him expelled from the party.  But, and it’s an important ‘but’, it wasn’t Corbyn who suspended him from the party it was the NEC and the events surrounding the 2016 leadership contest to not suggest that august body is packed out with Corbynites.

Far from Labour having ‘no choice’ but to reinstate him the truth is that Labour had ‘no choice’ but to suspend him over the sexting incident.

As I made very clear in my first comments about this incident in Northern Voices on 4 January 2016 I did not regard it as very shocking.  Sleazy Yes!  Stupid Yes! Shocking No!

 http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/the-incontinent-indiscretions-of-simon.html  

The whole thing seemed to me like an extremely clumsy attempt at flirting by a lonely man with nothing better to do with his time.  But as one might expect the media reports saw his antics in a different light.  The text messages were 'vile'.  The young woman, who it turned out was a ‘financial dominatrix’, had become a 'young girl'.

Had Labour not suspended him it would appear that the party was condoning the sort of behaviour towards someone who was technically a ‘child’, which Danczuk had made his reputation condemning.  To save itself a mauling in the ‘holier than thou’ tabloids Labour had to suspend him.

But casting Simon in the role ‘collateral damage’ like this does not get him off the hook.  The public expect people in public life to have some sense of decency; some sense of how to behave.  In spite of what Danczuk would have us believe this is not about ‘morality’ or ones ‘moral’ view about what he gets up to.

In my professional life had I been found to be to have been exchanging sexually explicit texts with a young woman of 17, serious questions would have been asked about my suitability to remain in my post.  The same questions about my suitability to continue in my job would have been asked if I had kicked in a glass door which shattered and shards of which fell on my ex-wife causing her to have injuries needing more than 40 stitches.

Had I been found to be ‘bonking’ a young woman half my age it would no doubt have drawn adverse comment.  In which case I would have felt justified in suggesting that the speaker should mind their own business.  But, and it’s an another important ‘but’, had I been found to have been using my office for the assignation, I would have been sacked.

I would also have been sacked if I had claimed £11,000 in expenses to which I had no entitlement.  No one would have given me the benefit of the doubt if I had tried to claim that it was all down to poor wording of the rules about what could be claimed.  I would have been out, probably with my pension rights rescinded.

I expect Danczuk to be treated in the same way that other people in responsible positions would be treated.  And I am not alone.

Danczuk in the Stranger's Bar

TO the Stranger’s bar in Westminster last night, where The Londoner shared a Coors beer or two with a very downhearted Simon Danczuk.  The MP for Rochdale was suspended from the Labour Party a year ago after a bout of sexting.  A disciplinary panel of the National Executive Committee met yesterday to discuss his case and came back to say they were delaying judgment.
Danczuk, who has technically been an independent MP for the past 12 months, was even beginning to wonder if he might defect.  He said he has been interviewed by party officials “and  believed the matter would be settled satisfactorily.  I’m disappointed that this committee has chosen to delay.”
Danczuk has never been on good terms with the Corbyn gang —
For more go to:-
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londoners-diary/londoners-diary-simon-danczuk-left-in-limbo-by-labour-a3443561.html

Bury Binmen back Ian Allinson in Unite's Top Job

YESTERDAY afternoon, a Bury Unite Commercial Branch meeting of mostly binmen in the Queen's Hotel on Bradley Lane, became one of the first Unite Branches to nominate Manchester lad, Ian Allinson, for the next General Secretary of Unite the Union. 
In putting forward Mr. Allinson for the Bury branch's nomination the Branch Secretary, Brian Bamford, said that he was not so keen on 'coronations' in matters of political or union issues, and that he felt that it was important that the Unite membership get as wide a choice as possible to lead them. 
Mr. Bamford made it clear that while he respected the current leader Len McCluskey he did not think it was healthy for the union to have a narrow choice of candidates. 
There was some debate about if by putting Ian Allinson on the ballot paper the Bury Branch would be splitting the so-called 'left-vote', and one or two people at the meeting said 'Who's heard of Ian Allison outside of Manchester?'
Someone else claimed that Len McCluskey was a well-established experienced officer, and Mr. Allinson was a new boy on the block, so wouldn't it be better to support someone more knowledgeable?
In response it was then argued that many people hadn't heard of Jeremy Corbyn before he was elected as the Labour leader.  Others thought that some officers spend too long in office, and thereby lose contact with the rank and file membership.  Ian Allison, who is a convenor at Fujitsu in Manchester, is not a paid official.
The only other candidate for the General Secretary's job, Gerard Coyne, is a Unite regional officer in the Midlands.
After considering the proposals of all three candidates the meeting voted unanimously to nominate to nominate Ian Allinson for General Secretary.
For more go to:
www.iansunitesite.org.uk/

Councillor Allen Brett 'Rattled' by Mr. Hennigan

by Les May

TO judge by his letter in last Saturday's Rochdale Observer Councillor Allen Brett is seriously rattled at the return of David Hennigan to local politics.  Now I know that Mr Hennigan is up to his neck in efforts to whip up support for protests against the recent rise in councillors expenses, but let's face it if Labour and the Tories had not made the mistake of voting themselves a rise at the present time, the Lib-Dems would not be able to 'make hay while the sun shines'.

In complaining about Mr Hennigan 'peddling his nasty brand of personal and offensive politics' Councillor Brett displays a conveniently short memory.

After Simon Danczuk's book was published in April 2014 there were repeated demands from Labour activists that named Lib-Dems should 'apologise for Cyril Smith'.  This only stopped when it was pointed out that when Cyril was conducting his fake medicals and spanking bottoms at Cambridge House he was a member of the Labour party.  And of course the late Mr Roger Chadwick is on record as saying that he told the Labour agent about Cyril's activities in 1966.  Whose turn to apologise now?

When this ploy brought only ridicule a story was drummed up about some notes which someone working for ex-Lib-Dem MP Liz Lynne had (probably) made of a telephone conversation about Cyril Smith 20 years years earlier.  Trivial though the story was it did not stop a Labour councillor writing a letter to the Rochdale Observer which started off referring to 'notes', which a few lines later became a 'file' and finally a 'dossier'.  

As for when the 'nasty brand of personal and offensive politics' came to Rochdale though there has always been antagonism between the parties it seems to have appeared in a particularly virulent form at about the same time as Mr Danczuk was selected as PPC for the town. I hasten to add the caveat that 'correlation does not imply causation'.

If you are sceptical check out this website:
http://rochdaleraw.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/big-cyrils-rap-sheet.html

It ran from November 2008 to February 2010 and styled itself Rochdale Alternative Website (RAW). By using images of the front cover of Rochdale Alternative Paper (RAP) it sought to give the impression that it was somehow taking over from where RAP left off, though having studied the content, I doubt that co-editors of RAP would have had anything to do with it.  They always had the guts to put their name to what they wrote.  Something that very few of those who contributed to the site ever had the courage to do.

If you have the patience to check out all the postings you’ll come across both personal abuse of Rochdale Lib-Dems (including of Hennigan) and closet homophobia.  You’ll also find both the same knowledge of Cyril Smith’s antics at Cambridge House and the misspelling of people’s names that characterises Danczuk and Baker’s book.

Interestingly enough the very first words to appear on the site mentioned the cartoon which Danczuk and Baker used in the second edition of their book without seeking  permission from RAP’s co-editors.  This resulted in the book’s publishers later paying £250 for the privilege and Mr Danczuk having a boy’s toilet in Gambia dedicated to him.

For the full story see:
http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/more-crappy-behaviour-surrounding.html


It is rumoured that RAW was run by a group which referred to themselves as 'Team Danczuk'.  However there seems to have been a ‘great falling out’ which may have mirrored what was happening in Rochdale Labour party at the time.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/party-stalwarts-left-facing-axe-929702
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/local-news/whitewash-claims-as-party-expels-five-930407
http://danczuk.tripod.com/domestic-behaviour.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3157459/Disturbing-questions-Simon-Danczuk-crusades-against-abuse.html

After the ‘great falling out’ a fake version of RAW looking identical to the ‘real’ one appeared which Labour party members used to attack each other and announce that they were not going to campaign for someone they called ‘Dumchuck’ (and other things).

Someone seems to have decided that these postings suggested that there may be less than wholehearted support for Mr Danczuk amongst Labour activists and had the ‘fake’ site taken down.  But it did exist and you can still find traces of it on the web if you look hard enough.

The ‘real’ version of RAW does not reflect very well on Labour either.  Whilst it still exists it makes Councillor Brett look like a Humbug who complains about a Lib-Dem activist when Labour activists have done much worse.  It also reminds people that complaining about Paul Rowan claiming 40p for a banana looks like silly whinging when set against Simon Danczuk claiming £11,000 for two of his children staying with him and then having to repay it when it came to light that it never happened.

But from my perspective it does serve one useful purpose.  It points up just how much Simon Danczuk and Matthew Baker owe to the work done 39 years earlier by the co-editors of RAP David Bartlett and john Walker.  What becomes
very clear after reading the RAW blog is that far from being the man who ‘outed’ Cyril Smith, Simon Danczuk is just a ‘Johnny come lately’.

I have no evidence that Allen Brett, Simon Danczuk or Matthew Baker were responsible for the content which appeared on the RAW website.  But it would be remarkable if they were not at least aware of it.

Tameside libraries to go unstaffed! Are library users at risk?

A report that recommends the introduction of ‘self-service’ libraries in Tameside, (Open+), was considered by the Executive Cabinet of Tameside Council on Wednesday 14 December 2016.

The report incorporates the findings of a library survey that took place over a six- week period during July and August and which received 807 responses on-line, but only 794 valid responses, after invalid responses were removed. The report says that the views of elected members were sought along with MPs and council staff, as well as young people and members of the Bengali community, in Hyde.

As part of ‘Vision Tameside’, the report authored by ‘Emma Varnam’, Interim Assistant Executive Director for Stronger Communities, says that £496,200 is to be invested in a range of technologies that will allow customers to use libraries when unstaffed.

As part of their ‘Vision’, the report says that it is intend to increase the number of volunteers to “support paid staff delivering the service.” Although the report says that it is not the intention to run any library using just volunteers, annual savings of £185,000, are to come from reduced expenditure on library staff, brought about by using volunteers and self-service libraries, which will include ‘self-issue’, ‘self-booking’ on PC’s and unstaffed hours. In June, a “Library Service Brief”, informed staff:

“The implementation of new technology will necessitate reconsideration of staffing levels i.e. a service review. This will again present opportunities for staff to apply for voluntary severance.”

In November, Sir Richard Leese, the leader of Labour controlled Manchester City Council, told a meeting of voluntary organisations that it was the role of voluntary organisations to “fill in the holes” left by public service cuts.

The report says that the introduction of self-service technology will increase library opening hours and allow Tameside Libraries to be retained in an affordable way. The law, the “Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964”, requires Tameside Council to provide a comprehensive and efficient library service for all individuals who live, work, or study, in the Borough and who are desirous of using the service. Usually following a complaint, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, has powers to intervene when a library authority fails (or is suspected of failing) to provide the required service.

Despite having “usable reserves” of nearly £205m as of 31 March 2015, Tameside Council closed five libraries in September 2012 and opening hours, were cut at the other eight remaining libraries. There are currently eight libraries in Tameside out of 22 libraries, a reduction of almost 64%. Most of these were axed well before the austerity Tory government of David Cameron, or the banking crises in 2008. Not only have Tameside library opening hours been reduced, but publications such as magazines and books have also been massively cut over the years.

The report stresses that there has been a downward trend both nationally and locally in both visits to libraries and issues. It is felt that the internet, smart phones, tablets, gaming and e-books, have all played a part in this downward trend. However, while there may be some truth in this, the report fails to recognise that fewer libraries, opening for fewer hours, with much reduced stock, might also explain the reduction in library visits and issues. Curiously, whereas library book loans, according to Nielsen Libscan, are reckoned to have slumped by almost 16m in the last two years, book sales for adults and children’s books have continued to climb. Library campaigners, such as Tim Coates, blame the reduction in cuts to book stocks and opening hours, which he believes undermine libraries.

The Tameside library survey indicates that most people use the library service to borrow books, to access PC’s, read magazines and newspapers, and to ask for advice and information. The report also indicates that library users greatly value the work that library staff do and don’t want to see staff axed. Many people indicated that the number of Tameside councillors should be cut along with their expenses in order to fund services and staff.

The responses given in the Tameside library survey of 747 people, are extremely interesting and perhaps not what Tameside Council were expecting. When asked whether they agreed or disagreed with the proposition that self-issue technology in libraries and longer opening hours with reduced library staff, was preferable to closing more libraries, 63.15% agreed and 36.85 disagreed. Some 65.88% of people said that they used self-service technology regularly, occasionally, or had done so one or twice. A quarter of responders (25.72%), indicated that they would not use self-issue technology under any circumstances. The survey of young people (106 people responded), indicates that 50.94% agree with the ‘vision’ but 49.06% disagreed. Interestingly, most young people surveyed, said they would not use self-service technology. When asked about voluntary work with Tameside library service, most people surveyed (86.13%), said they would not be interested in volunteering. No doubt, many people object to doing a job (unpaid), that someone was previously paid to do. There also seems to be some evidence that females are reluctant to use an unstaffed library because they feel unsafe in the presence of men, whereas, men are more likely to use an unstaffed library. One female respondent, indicated that she had observed a library user watching pornography on his library computer.

Although it is proposed to install CCTV in libraries and that only people given ‘VIP user status’ - a trusted member of the library service - will be given access to unstaffed libraries, it is felt that this is not sufficient to mitigate any risk. In “Open+” mode, children under 16-years-old, must be accompanied by an adult. At some unstaffed libraries in Stockport, library users are already being warned that they use the library at their own risk. This of course, does not indemnify any council, who have a duty of care, to members of the public using their premises.  Those who are given access to unstaffed libraries also have ensure there is no “tailgating”. The report also recognises that older people may have difficulty using self-issue technology such as swipe cards. People with disabilities may also have difficulty with access.

The report makes clear that there are currently 45.2 full-time equivalent staff required to operate the library service, whereas, only 38.6 would be required under the new operating model. In addition, a further 6.6 jobs are to be axed, around 15 jobs in total. However, in the Tameside Library service, there are more chiefs than Indians (59 library officers to 45.2 library staff). The report isn’t clear where the axe will fall on library bosses, if at all. 

Tameside Leader fails to deliver on pledges!

Old Ashton Baths - December 2016

In the Spring 2016 issue of Tameside Council's free rag, 'The Tameside Citizen', Kieran Quinn, the Executive Leader of Tameside Council, outlined 16 pledges that he claimed would make a difference for Tameside communities. One of his pledges was that Tameside Council would rollout free WiFi across the town centres of Tameside. But with roughly three days to go before we go into the New Year 2017, it looks like 'The Leader' will fail on this pledge and has failed to come up with the goods! But what should we expect from any politician, if not false promises.

We were told in the summer issue of the 'Citizen', No76:

"By the autumn all nine of the borough's town centres will be covered by the SWIFT network - Smart Wireless Internet for Tameside. Access to the free town centre Wi-Fi will be fast and simple. Once logged in, people will be automatically connected as they move from town to town go to Tameside College or visit Tameside Hospital. Ashton and Dukinfield will benefit from dark fibre broadband, installed for the digital hub at Ashton Old Baths, which offers the highest speeds and reliability in the UK."

Talk about being hoist by your own petard, where is the dark fibre broadband? The people of Tameside are still waiting for this pledge to come to fruition. You'll find more fibre in your breakfast cereal than in Tameside. As for the Ashton Old Baths, the last time I past, the windows had been put in and the building is now occupied by pigeons.

Film-maker calls on Danczuk to sleep-outside

SIMON DANCZUK MP  has declined to sleep on the streets after the documentary film-maker, Gary Jay suggested he do so following Danczuk's derogator comments about beggars in Rochdale town centre last week.

A year ago, Gary spent four days filming his experience of living on the streets in Manchester city centre for a documentary called ‘Human Garbage’ during which time he was attacked, spat on and threatened.

The film-maker Mr. Jay was reported in the Manchester Evening News (MEN) as saying:

'I slept with drug addicts, alcoholics, was threatened by the city’s drug dealers with my life and attacked.

'I would like to send out a personal challenge to Mr Danczuk to do exactly the same thing again, with me to see what it is like to beg for food, money to feed yourself, be spat at, be ignored, sleep in doorways, be robbed, be attacked and be preyed on by drug dealers.

'I promised my family I would never do such a thing again, but I can not stand by and watch as a man who demands such high wages comment on people who have little to nothing and not be challenged for his actions as a member of parliament.

'I thought it was disgusting for a person in a position of power to make a comment like that. Now he’s now part of the problem.'

The MEN has contacted Mr Danczuk for a comment, but apparently the MP has not yet responded.

Cartoon from Washington Post