DUBAI ON DEANSGATE - Report warns of property bubble crash in Manchester!

Beetham Tower Deansgate

A report published in November 2016, by the ‘Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change’ (CRESC), based at the University of Manchester, outlines Manchester’s transformation over 25-years and shows how councillors and officers working with property developers, transformed Manchester City and Salford.

The report says that what has been built, is a parallel new town in Manchester City, of office blocks and adjacent one and two bedroom flats, occupied by a 25 to 34-year-old in-migrant workforce, that lives, works and plays, within the city centre. Of this in-migrant workforce, 34% were born outside the UK and Ireland and 24% from outside Europe. The report says that many work in junior white-collar occupations, linked to local government, health, education, or the private sector. Alternatively, they work in retail, restaurants, or hotels, which employ 25% of the workforce. The report asserts that this has led to ‘exclusive’ growth and inequalities – “Dubai on Deansgate”, that has not spilled over into other areas of Greater Manchester.

Other areas within Greater Manchester, are described has being economically ‘dire’ and characterised by low-wages and precarious employment. These areas, the report says, have never fully recovered from the ‘de-industrialisation’ of the 1980’s. The report states:

“The plight of Bolton, Rochdale, Stockport, and Tameside, is dire, because from 2008-14 they have lost both private and public sector jobs and, in a period of austerity cuts in public expenditure, some boroughs are now losing private sector jobs faster than they are losing public sector jobs.”

Seemingly, only Manchester City and Trafford have shown significant increases in job numbers, while four of the ten boroughs of Greater Manchester saw net job losses. In addition, 21% of Greater Manchester’s neighbourhoods are in the top 10% most deprived in England and Manchester City, has 41% of Greater Manchester’s neighbourhoods in this category.

The report points out that central Manchester is not like central London, which relies on radial commuting by public transport from outer boroughs – “Long distance commuting is discouraged because Manchester city region combines relatively cheap central flats and inner residential suburbs with low wages and high fares… Most commuting into Manchester City is by car.”

The people who live within Greater Manchester are heavily dependent on public sector jobs. The public sector accounted for more than half of the 46,000 extra jobs created in ten Greater Manchester boroughs between 1998-2008. Manufacturing employs less than 4% of the Manchester City workforce but still accounts for 10% of employment in northern boroughs. Out of total Greater Manchester employment of 1,197k, 447k or 37.3%, are employed in “mundane”, activities. Manchester’s public and state-supported sector, now employs more than 35% of the workforce in a city heavily dependent on health and education spending. The report argues that the Greater Manchester private sector economy, has a very limited capacity to generate good jobs which pay high wages.

It has been argued by some social pundits that Manchester’s growing inequality, is a good thing because like London, it is proof that it has managed to create well-paying jobs for at least a minority of its population, whereas, in other areas, they may be more equal, but this is because everyone is poor.

The report rejects this and says that what is needed is not ‘exclusive’ growth, but ‘inclusive’ economic growth, that spills-over into other areas of Greater Manchester and provides people with real opportunities. What is needed, in the view of the authors, is a move away from property development as the accelerator of urban growth, which has only benefitted the city, towards “welfare-critical basic goods and services” for the whole population – “affordable transport, accessible broadband, and social housing – 80,000 people are on the housing waiting lists of the ten GM boroughs – that would take precedence over ostentatious tower blocks.”

The report also says that there ought to be investment in the foundational economy – food distribution and processing, education and health, adult care, pipe and cable utilities and public transport, leading to low-fare public transport, for all Greater Manchester residents. It is also argued that the 185,000 businesses in Greater Manchester should be made to pay decently (the living wage) and to employ and train local workers, as their businesses, draw revenue from Greater Manchester.

The Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF), will lead to the new town in Manchester City, doubling in size from 2015 to 2035. Alongside this, there will be large edge of city housing developments and warehouse parks off the orbital M60. A quarter of housing, is earmarked to be built on green belt sites. The term “social housing”, does not appear anywhere in the GMSF draft.

The authors of this report, argue that the political elite of Greater Manchester, ought to learn lessons from the Brexit vote which revealed an increasingly disgruntled electorate that are asking local, regional, and national politicians, “What have you done for us!” They also warn that Brexit, increases the likelihood of “capital flight, currency depreciation, a rise in interest rates, and a slump in house prices and in construction activity”, which could lead to a property bubble crash in and across Greater Manchester.

Ian Allinson's Thoughts for Unite's Future etc.

by Ian Allinson

MY provisional thoughts are that we should establish some ongoing organisation within Unite. I think it is important that this isn’t primarily focused on elections – it shouldn’t be a rival to the United Left, but occupy a position more like the Construction Rank and File which includes members who are and are not United Left supporters.  Though I disagreed with their stance, many good activists have backed Len McCluskey in the current election and members need all of us to work together after the election.
If its focus isn’t internal elections, what could such an organisation do? Some possibilities, depending on the views and commitment of those involved, could include:

1. Putting like-minded activists in touch with each other on the basis of region, industry or issue.
2. Acting as an umbrella organisation supporting groups of activists in particular industries pushing for a more robust approach to specific industrial issues e.g. to reject bad deals, raise neglected issues or challenge partnership arrangements.
3. If I’m not elected as General Secretary, can we as activists implement some of the pledges anyway? For example a regular bulletin highlighting disputes, campaigns and other information; or collecting case studies of our successes?
4. Campaigning to change Unite Policies and Rules.
5. Getting experts and activists together to thrash out effective responses to specific issues affecting many sectors e.g. performance management.

In addition to the issues raised in the election campaign, many members have been raising the need to reform Unite’s election processes, for example:

• Control of campaign spending. Are the huge sums spent by the two establishment candidates in this campaign external interference in our democratic process? Or are they from Unite funds? Does anyone seriously think members expect hundreds of thousands of pounds of their money to be spent promoting candidates rather than promoting their interests?
• A level playing field on access to and use of branch, activist and member data to strike the right balance between trying to engage members and preventing them being spammed by candidates with privileged access.
• Official hustings so that all members can engage directly with the debates.
• Change from First Past The Post to Single Transferable Vote (as used by many unions) so members can vote for the candidates they want without fear of “splitting the vote?

 Many of the ideas put forward in our campaign have gained wide support – not just from those who voted for me.

• All meaningful change comes from below, and all meaningful change is the result of collective effort. So how can we most effectively take forward our ideas after the campaign?
  The ian4unite campaign is organising four post-election meetings to discuss this. If you want to push forward the broad agenda I’m campaigning for you are welcome at these meetings no matter who you have supported in the election:
  
• Saturday 6 May: 1:30 – 3pm, Avant Garde, 34-44 King Street Glasgow G1 5QT [Facebook event]
  
• Sunday 7 May: 2-4pm, Peterloo Room, Mechanics Centre, 103 Princess St (Major St entrance), Manchester, M1 6DD [Facebook event]
• Saturday 13 May: Alumni Lecture Theatre, Room 110, SOAS Senate House, Paul Webley Wing, Malet Street, London, WC1 7HU [Facebook event]
• Sunday 14 May: 3-5pm, Briar Rose, 25 Bennetts Hill, Birmingham B2 5RE [Facebook event]

Download leaflet for post-election meetings

Unite's Len McCluskey Wins on a Low turn-out

by Brian Bamford

LEN McCluskey, the incumberant, and the favourite to win the election for general secretary of the Unite union, has been re-elected leader.  Yet the victory was much closer than anticipated:
McCluskey won 59,067 votes (45.4%), Gerard Coyne got 53,544 (41.5%) and the rank and file candidate Ian Allinson took 17,143 (13.1%), on a low turnout of just over 12%, the union announced.
The Coyne team was hoping for a high turnout of up to 20% of the membership, which they believed would have ensured a surprise victory.   McCluskey’s vote dropped from 144,570 in 2013 when the turnout was nearly 15%.
As a consequence of these figures the result cannot be seen as a ringing endorsement of the trade unionism or of their influence in British society.  Even among its own membership the Unite union has struggled to interest the members sufficiently to vote for a leader who might cast a shadow over political life.  And if the union leaders cannot even involve their own members in a significant way for such an event as a union election, why indeed should the general public listen to their leaders' deliberations on social or political matters?
It looks like McCluskey has got 60% less of the vote he got in 2013:  144,570 in 2013 down to 59,067 votes in 2017.
Today, The Guardian website reports:
'Coyne’s camp will this weekend take legal advice over unsent and late ballot papers and what they see as a flawed electoral process.
'Coyne, who ran a campaign alleging that McCluskey was misspending members’ money and was too involved in national politics, responded to the result with a statement calling for McCluskey to change the way the union was run.'
Gerard Coyne is now saying:
'The union machine consistently attempted to bully and intimidate me, something that has continued even after the close of polls.'
'Turnout has fallen disastrously. Many members have reported to me that they did not get their ballot paper at all or, if they did, that it arrived literally on the day polls closed and so was useless. This was no vote of confidence, with falling turnout and a halving of Len McCluskey’s previous vote.'
Wil Hutton on The Guardian website on the 9th, April, arguing that the British left is in 'a malaise', wrote;
 'The brutal truth is that trade unions need root-and-branch reinvention to attract new members. Then, from the legitimacy won by having a base of rising membership, they could start to insist on the rewriting of fairer laws that incorporate new forms of collective bargaining and participation and so recast the increasingly high-risk, low-quality character of the British workplace. McCluskey, like the current Labour leadership he so generously but misguidedly backs, is nowhere near thinking through what is needed.'
I have listened to the arguments for McCluskey and they fixate upon his links to the old left, that he once was a supporter of Militant and he once had a job in the docks in Liverpool.  But I believe my branch members - the members of Bury Unite Commercial Branch - were right to nominate Ian Allinson and get him on the ballot paper to open up a debate and deny McCluskey a coronation.  They were right to do that even though Ian Allinson was a rank outsider.  But in the same way and for the same reasons I agree with the economist Wil Hutton, when he writes 'Coyne is at least attempting to open up the debate about how Unite can grow. The union has an income of £170m; Coyne calls for more transparency in how this money is spent, disputing sweetheart deals backing Jeremy Corbyn'.
It is also clear for anyone who gives the matter any serious thought, that Wil Hutton is right when he argues: 'McCluskey, Corbyn, John McDonnell and the leaders of Momentum are not moving beyond slogans and their preoccupation is less with winning power than hard wiring ancient and outmoded left positions into union and party policies that turn Labour into an unelectable social movement.'
It is not that the old British left is too radical, it is that they are too conservative.  The minds of these men McCluskey, Corbyn and McDonnell are the minds of men who have gramaphone records for brains whose needles have become stuck.  Such men are inadequately placed to solve the current social and political problems.

Gerard Coyne Accuses Unite Machine of Bullying

Gerard Coyne, who narrowly lost the Unite leadership election to Len McCluskey, has put out a statement accusing the union machine of bullying and intimidating him.  He said:

It has been a very close count and the ballot sends some very serious messages to Unite.
I am proud to have run a campaign that faced up to the issues that concerned members.  Unite needs to change, and it needs to put its focus back where it belongs: on looking after the real interests of the members of the union.
It’s been a hard and robust campaign. The union machine consistently attempted to bully and intimidate me, something that has continued even after the close of polls.
Nevertheless tens of thousands of members backed my fight to change our union for the better.
On the downside, turnout has fallen disastrously.  Many members have reported to me that they did not get their ballot paper at all or if they did, that it arrived literally on the day polls closed and so was useless.
This was no vote of confidence, with falling turnout and a halving of Len McCluskey’s previous vote.  It’s time for all those that were involved to reflect on the message that the union’s membership are sending to the organisation."

Unite Candidate Coyne Suspended!

TODAY the challenger to Len McCluskey to become boss of the Unite union, Gerard Coyne, has been suspended from his job as West Midland regional secretary.
It is believed that this decision is associated with comments he made about Len McCluskey during the recent election campaign in which Mr Coyne was a contender to become general secretary of Unite.  Some statements by Coyne have referred to the purchase of a flat with the help of trade union loans. 
There have also claims that Coyne's campaign used Labour party data to contact members to see whether they would back him.
This suspension from his post ought not impact on the leadership election,.
Ballots closed yesterday, with turnout said to be lower than expected at around 12 per cent.
Insiders have described the result as being 'on a knife edge'.
Unite has 1.4 million members, and last year donated £1.5 million to the Labour party.

Today, BBC news reports:
'The battle to be the union's general secretary is understood to be on a "knife edge," from early sampling of the ballots by both sides.'
Counting is due to be completed tomorrow with the result to be announced next week.

British general election,and a little local difficulty

 LAST July, Les May dissected the local consequences of what would happen if a snap election were to be called following the Brexit vote [see northern voicesmag' link below] .  Below we reprint the original article by Mr. May.  Les May got it wrong when he said he was  'sceptical [when] it has been suggested that the new Tory leader might dissolve the parliament and call an election to give him/herself a so called 'mandate' to try to negotiate with the EU.'  adding 'that might not be so easy to do'.
In the end when Thresa May came to call the early general election this week it proved perfectively easy to engineer.  Jeremy Corbyn has yet to be overthrown, and still clings on to power like shit to a blanket. Yet, some Downing Street insiders even suggest now that one of the reasons that the election was called now was because of the fear that had Labour done as badly as expected in the forthcoming local elections on the 4th, May, Jeremy Corbyn may have resigned and that would have resulted in the risk of Theresa May having to face an election later under a new Labour leader.later.
 Les May's hope that the Labour Party might block a snap election if called, has fairly predicably proved to be a vain expectation.   Turkey's, it seems, in some circumstnces feel compelled to vote for Christmas.  Robert Shrimsley in the Financial Times writes;
 '...Jermy Corbyn, the Labour leader, and his strategists know that they are really fighting to prevent a fundemental political relignment of the left in British politics (or to be precise English and Welsh politics).   There is no doubt that if the most dire forecasts are to be believed - and we have all learned the value of opinion polls - then Labour is in an existential fight for its survival as a major force in politics.'
Meanwhile, at the micro level of political life the Rochdale Labout Party has yet to decide what to do about its former MP, Simon Danczuk, who is still suspended from the national party.  Last July, Les May wrote:  'Simon [Danczuk] is still Rochdale's MP.  Though suspended from the Labour party for sending texts of a sexual nature to a young woman who contacted him and who later turned out to have a nice sideline as a financial dominatrix, there is no sign that the local Labour party have taken steps to distance itself from him or that the national party are in any hurry to reinstate him.'
Rarile this week ROCHDALE ONLINE REPORTED:  'Locally, Labour party members are divided on whether or not Mr Danczuk should be welcomed back into the Labour fold, and hence the Labour candidate. One councillor adamant that must not happen is Councillor Chris Furlong, who has long been a vocal critic of Mr Danczuk. Councillor Furlong says he is "seriously considering standing for the Labour candidacy after being inundated by Rochdale members asking him to stand against Danczuk".'
Nationally Labour's National Executive Committee is still conducting investigations.into Simon Danczuk, but regarding Mr Danczuk selection as MP for Rochdale, the party has said:
'The process for selecting candidates in all our seats, including Rochdale, will begin shortly.'
Mr Danczuk, who has been an MP for the town since 2010, has naturally said that he is the 'best-placed person' to fight the snap general election for the party. (Editorial 20th, April 2017)

http://northernvoicesmag.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/brexit-fall-out-little-local-problem.html

Brexit, a little local difficulty

publish 4th, July 2016 by Les May

WHEN the milkman called to collect his money this evening his comment on Brexit was 'Well they said there'd be job losses, but they didn't say it would start at the top!'.  Cameron's gone,  Boris has gone and if Labour MPs have their way Corbyn will be gone too, though at the moment I would not bet on it.  So whose next?

In spite of the referendum result no one in government seems to be in a big hurry to trigger the process of actually leaving the EU.  Cameron wisely dumped the problem onto his successor.  Presumably he thought that would be Boris and there would be a kind of justice in him having to clear up the political mess he has caused.  But now we know it won't.

Tory MPs will vote for the candidates who have put their name forward.  The two successful candidates will be go forward to a final vote in which all members of the Tory party will be balloted.  No doubt quite a lot of Labour MPs will be wishing they had a system for electing a new leader like that of the Tories.

In the autumn the new leader will be ordained at the party conference.  And then what?

Though I'm sceptical myself it has been suggested that the new Tory leader might dissolve the parliament and call an election to give him/herself a so called 'mandate' to try to negotiate with the EU.   But that might not be so easy to do.

Fixed-term Parliaments, where general elections ordinarily take place in accordance with a schedule set far in advance, were part of the Tory-LibDem coalition agreement which was produced after the 2010 general election. This was consolidated in the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011.

There are two provisions under the act by which an early election can be called.

If the House of Commons resolves “That this house has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government”, an early general election is held, unless the House of Commons subsequently resolves 'That this house has confidence in Her Majesty's Government.'  This second resolution must be made within fourteen days of the first.

If the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves 'That there shall be an early parliamentary general election.'

The first of these options would require the government to launch a motion of no confidence in itself or ask the opposition to do so and the second would mean that the government would have to get the support of 434 of the 650 MPs to secure the necessary majority.

Conversely 217 MPs could block it.  Labour has 232 MPs so even without the 56  Scottish Nationalist MPs they could block it.  That puts the Labour leader, whether Corbyn or someone else, in a position of considerable strength.

Even without their present difficulties they might be wise to do so.  After all it's the Tories who got the country into this mess.  What is clear even now, and becomes clearer every day, is that try as it might, no UK government, whether Tory or Labour, is going to get access to the so called 'single market' unless it accepts free movement of workers, a.k.a. immigration.  

This is why:  'The internal market, or single market, of the European Union (EU), also known as the European single market, is a single market that seeks to guarantee the free movement of goods, capital, services, and people – the "four freedoms" – between the EU's 28 member states.'

So why not just sit back and watch the Tories fail?  Why take the risk of being contaminated by the fall out from this failure?

But there are clearly quite a lot of Labour MPs who are deluded enough to think that if there were an early election they would have a chance of winning it after spending most of the past year creating a huge rift in the party by monumental disloyalty and attacks on the present (and quite likely future) leadership.

But if my scepticism is misplaced and there is an election with Labour's passive or active cooperation, then things get particularly interesting for those of us in Rochdale.  You see Labour will have a 'little local problem' in the form of Simon Danczuk MP.

Now Simon has been mercifully silent in recent months.  If it wasn't for the visit to the police station to be questioned about a rape allegation,  being told he had to repay £11,000 he claimed in expenses, the small matter of the claim for parking when parliament was not sitting and the recent £500 claim for 'crisis management', we would have entirely forgotten about him.  The last of these claims is particularly galling as we have known since January that he received £5,000 from the Sun for an interview about the crisis!  Or is it, as the Zelo Street blogger Tim Fenton would have it, that the money was claimed for something else entirely?

But Simon is still Rochdale's MP.  Though suspended from the Labour party for sending texts of a sexual nature to a young woman who contacted him and who later turned out to have a nice sideline as a financial dominatrix, there is no sign that the local Labour party have taken steps to distance itself from him or that the national party are in any hurry to reinstate him.

So what happens if I am wrong and there is an autumn General Election?  Rochdale Labour party would find itself facing an election without a candidate endorsed by the Labour party and with about a month to find one.

But there may be worse to come.  According to a former girlfriend who was interviewed by The Mirror on 2 January 2016, 'he had vowed to stand as an independent if his career was threatened' and that 'He said he would stand as an independent but not do any campaigning'. He said he wanted to make sure Labour lost the seat he won for them.

My advice to Rochdale Labour party is 'start distancing yourself from Danczuk now before it's too late.' 
Does any party want to be associated in the public mind with someone who is seen by people in the town as a freeloader?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed-term_Parliaments_Act_2011
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015
http://www.europeanpolicy.org/en/european-policies/single-market.html
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/100883/danczuk-claims-nearly-700-for-just-four-months-parking
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/18/simon-danczuk-labour-agrees-repay-expenses
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news-headlines/103734/danczuk-claims-500-on-expenses-for-crisis-management-over-Christmas
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2016/06/simon-danczuks-consultant-revealed.html
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1352498/shamed-simon-danczuk-claimed-money-for-crisis-management-after-the-sun-exposed-his-sordid-texts-to-teenage-girl/
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/09/simon-danczuk-5000-sun-on-sunday-interview
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mp-claimed-500-to-calm-sex-text-crisis-wqjbpxxbg
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/01/labour-mp-simon-danczuk-crisis-management-expenses
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/simon-danczuk-made-500-expenses-8322755
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/self-obsessed-simon-danczuk-cried-7109813

'anarchy in a Cold War'!

We publish the blurb about the book below without comment, not having read it.

Perhaps if any of our readers have read it, they would comment on it?  (Editors)

This book by Kurtis Sunday might be of interest:

Book description:

Anarchy in a Cold War is a novel by Kurtis Sunday set in the West Berlin alternative-squatter-Punk scene during the latter part of the Cold War. The city, a focal point in the conflict between East and West, was a capitalist enclave smack in the middle of Communist East Germany. It was entirely surrounded by the Berlin Wall, complete with razor wire and machine gun posts. There is much that is familiar and much that is not. The Cold War is raging and the missiles are armed and waiting in their silos. If nuclear war breaks out there will be a four minute warning. There is no internet and perhaps NO FUTURE. Reality? Sur-reality? Or hyper-reality?

There is a also a free (Creative Commons) the ebook version (PDF, epub and mobi) of Anarchy in a Cold War now available at

Unglue.it:

https://unglue.it/work/191661

and/or

the Internet Archive:

https://archive.org/details/AnarchyInAColdWarKurtisSunday

Grüße,
K

Yesterday's men (& woman) back Mr. Coyne,

 as Coyne Calls for a Unite union Clean Up

CALLING for a 'clean up' of the Unite union Gerard Coyne, one of the candidates in the Unite election for General Secretary, wrote on his Blog:

'Your union takes more than £150 million of subscription money from members every year. I do not believe there is enough openness about how your money is spent. You deserve better, so I will give members like you oversight of Unite’s finances. Vote Gerard Coyne now and clean up Unite.'

***

Meanwhile, on Wednesday 5 April 2017 three former union bosses; Roger Lyons Former general secretary, Manufacturing, Science and Finance Union; Bill Morris Former general secretary, Transport and General Workers Union and Margaret Prosser Former president, Trades Union Congress wrote a letter to The Guardian:
'We believe that strong unions are essential to public life and that they are both the best and the last defence of working people against abuse and exploitation. With Brexit adding to the pressures on working people and injecting huge additional instability into the economy, it is essential unions are able to exert the maximum industrial strength....
'Our labour movement always needs to be engaged in renewal and in searching out new ideas and new methods to advance its aims. Gerard Coyne is the candidate who can do most to deliver new ideas and reinvigorate our movement at a supremely difficult moment.'

 Gerard Coyne 'bringing union's name into disrepute'?

There have been criticisms from Coyne that has annoyed Len McCluskey’s supporters, for whom loyalty to the union means not bringing its name into disrepute.
McCluskey, a former employee in Liverpool’s dockyards, has the advantage of a national profile, as well as being a formidable operator at branch level.
His campaign has won the largest number of nominations ever, including from defence workers at the Faslane and Coulport naval bases in Scotland and the Barrow shipyards in Cumbria – despite Corbyn’s opposition to Trident renewal.

Voting ends on the 19th, April, and Coyne has a tough fight before him.  Rupert Murdoch's The Sun newspaper may be backing Coyne, but the Mirror and Morning Star have lined up behind McCluskey.  Most of the apparatus and officers of the Unite union have been seemingly marshalled behind Len McCluskey.
Supporters of Coyne believe there is still a chance of victory, if they can get a higher turnout of Unite’s 1.4 million members to vote.  The low turnout in union elections – 15.2% voted in the 2013 general secretary contest – hands disproportionate influence to its radical activists, many of whom may see McCluskey as too rightwing.

Ian Allinson condemns 'treacherous role of some union officials' 

The third candidate and shopfloor activist, Ian Allinson, may take votes from McCluskey.  On the blacklist in the British building trade, Ian Allinson has said:
'It is great that Len McCluskey has backed calls for an enquiry, but the gap between the blacklisted workers’ view of the evidence and his own is worrying. 
'McCluskey says: “While new evidence has unfolded in the High Court proceedings it is not the case that this evidence points towards present or previous union officials”.
'It is hard to believe that the employers’ blacklist could be as extensive and long-lasting as it was without the treacherous role played by some union officials.'

Commenting on the recent Unite / UCATT merger Mr. Allinson calls on Unite to clean out the stable: 'UK construction workers have, for the first time, the possibility of being organised in one big united union, apart from small numbers of workers in GMB.  However, if the merger takes place at a purely formal and bureaucratic level, the chance to extend real democracy and rank and file control would be lost.  Worse still if we missed the chance to clean the Augean stable of the complicity and corruption which has robbed union activists of their livelihoods and wrecked families.'

Rank & File labelled 'A Cancer'!

Len McCluskey has been in office as the General Secretary of Unite sine 2011, yet what has he done about the alleged crooked officials in the union?  We know from what is being said by the lads on the job, is that many believe that the blacklist in the British building industry is alive and kicking!
When the rank and file make achievements and score victories it is often in spite of the officer class rather than because of them.  But it is often the officer class that claims the credit.
As Ian Allinson has pointed out:
'Construction activists have shown that grassroots democratic movements, the Construction Rank and File and the Blacklist Support Group, have begun to make officials accountable as well as building the beginnings of a real fighting union at workplace and sector level.'
Very often the rank and file campaign has been denounced by the officer class, and it was once describe as 'a cancer' by one trade union functionary still in office. 
Coyne is right the Unite union needs cleaning up!  More precisely it needs an officer class that is answerable to to its members.

Manchester Rank & File Meeting

Comrades

The next meeting of the Rank and File will be held on:

Saturday 20th May 2017

in

Mechanics Institute

103 Princess Street, Manchester, M1 6DD

at

12noon - 3pm

Hope to see you all there.

If you haven't voted in the GS and EC elections, please DO IT NOW. Today is the last postal date for it to be in for the 19th April, due to the Easter holiday. A reminder of who our candidates are:

General Secretary:   Len McCluskey

EC Ucatt sector:       Frank Morris, Joe Pisani, Jimmy Tyson and Tony Seaman.

Gerard Coyne is running a particular nasty campaign, with personal attacks, praying on people's fears and using the Sun to get his poisonous message out. This man is not fit to be the head of our union and should be called in to answer serious questions on his actions after this election.​

In solidarity

Jim

Ken Livingstone Hung Out To Dry!

by Barry Woodling

KEN Livingstone has been hung out to dry by Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour Party.  It ill behoves Corbyn to criticise Ken since the former has shared a platform with holocaust denials such as Hamas.  Livingstones comments are supported by a plethora of historical evidence from Zionist, German and other sources.

National Socialists and Zionists collaborated because they had similar ideologies re ethnicity and nationhood.  There is considerable evidence adduced by historians to demonstrate that the Hitler government supported Zionist and Jewish emigration to Palestine between 1933 and 1940.  Joachim Prinz a Berlin rabbi who later became head of the American Jewish Congress wrote in his 1933 book  "Wir Juden"  (We are Jews) that the National Socialist Revolution meant "Jewry for the Jews".  Stephen Wise President of the American Jewish congress and the World Jewish congress told a New York rally in June 1930 "I am a Jew. Hitler was right in one thing.  He calls the Jewish people a race. We are a race".  Even the SS was enthusiastic in its support for Zionism in its paper Das Schwarze Korps in May 1935.   Vide Francis Nicosia. The Third Reich and the Palestinian Question. (1985) p54/55.

The centrepiece of German-Zionist collaboration during the Hitler era was the Haavara or Transfer Agreement concluded in 1932 which enabled tens of thousands of German Jews to migrate to Palestine with their wealth. Hitler reviewed the agreement in July and September 1937 and January 1938 and decided to maintain the Haavara Agreement. (W Feildenfeld et alia. The Haavara Transfer Agreement 1932 p32). This was the most far reaching example of collaboration between Hitlers Germany and international Zionism. Hitlers Third Reich did more than any other government during the 1930s to support Jewish development in Palestine.

In conclusion, the Labour Party witch hunt against Livingstone for his comments about Hitler supporting Zionism is totally unwarranted and yet a further example of the political bankruptcy of the Labour Party and a "shameful" capitulation to the Zionist lobby.

Mayoral elections in Greater Manchester. Do people know what they're voting for?

Manchester Town Hall

NEXT month, the 2.8 million people of Greater Manchester, will be asked to vote for the first directly elected mayor for Greater Manchester, who will have powers over transport, homes, policing, and skills.

A great deal has been said about the lack of consultation with the public about ‘Devolution for Manchester’, also known as ‘Devo Manc’. Research that has been undertaken, suggests that while some people may have heard about ‘devolution’, most people have virtually no public understanding of what it means.  

A 2015 survey, revealed that 88% of people questioned, had never heard of Devo Manc. Indeed, few will be aware, that almost twelve-months ago, Greater Manchester acquired control of the regions £6bn health and social care budget. Similarly, the clear majority of the people of Greater Manchester, will be unaware that the consultation ‘Taking Charge Together’, ever took place and that only 6,000 people out of a population of 2.8 million, have responded.

This lack of a general understanding about Devo Manc by the people of Greater Manchester, seems all the stranger, when it is being claimed that devolution will give power back to the people and let them have greater control over the decisions that affect them. Yet, the devolution deal was signed behind closed doors in Manchester Town Hall and more than two years on, the population of Greater Manchester, remain largely shut out of the conversation. The Labour MP, Lisa Nandy, who represents Wigan, recently wrote:

“The public consultation on these sweeping changes was not properly publicised, ran for just three weeks and received only 12 responses – 10 of them from the same council leaders that signed the deal in the first place. It didn’t even mention the NHS. When the deal was announced by press release from Whitehall, MPs, councillors, and the public had little idea what it was. And as legislation was passed to enable the transfer of powers, it wasn’t even clear who in government was accountable for it.”

Although the MP for Wigan believes that the UK is moving towards a more federal structure, she fears that devolution decision-making in Greater Manchester, will not be pushed down to the people, but leveled up from local communities to Manchester town hall. Nandy points out that the decision to have a directly elected mayor for Greater Manchester, was imposed from Whitehall less than two years after the city of Manchester voted to reject one. Moreover, the current interim mayor, Tony Lloyd, is accountable to only ten people (his cabinet), who put him in into the job and are responsible for delivering his agenda. Seemingly, the minutes of these meetings are not published and “journalists have to do FOI requests to discover who is making the decisions.” Regarding “health devolution” in Greater Manchester, Nandy says:

“Healthier Together”, disrupted collaboration that was already taking place between local areas, took little account of the reality of people’s lives, and pursued hospital closures and centralization of services…asking people to travel long distances on non-existent transport networks when they already struggled to afford fares on low incomes…The risk is that decisions will be made in central Manchester with towns and rural areas just an afterthought.”

Research by the Fabian Society, using focus groups, carried out between September-October 2016, into public attitudes towards health devolution in Greater Manchester, found that people wanted local input into healthcare but not at the expense of equality. Though broadly sympathetic towards the idea of investing in prevention, most participants were keen to avoid a ‘post-code’ lottery of healthcare and some wondered what would happen to healthcare in Greater Manchester, if the money ran out or was mismanaged. Most participants supported uniformity over variability. Few participants had heard of ‘healthcare devolution’ nor understood what devolution meant.  All groups considered newly elected mayors as unfit to oversee healthcare and generally felt that decisions about healthcare should be left to experts. 

A YouGov survey – “HEALTH LOCALISM: what the English public thinks”, carried in October 2016, found that “Only 9% of people believed that councils and councillors should have the most say on local healthcare.” While evidence from the focus groups, indicated a certain un-enthusiasm about residents having more say in decision-making, the national YouGov poll, wanted residents to have more say.

While the people of Greater Manchester are being asked to vote for a metro-mayor next month, it seems that few really understand what they are voting for or how they got Devo Manc in the first place. Like mushrooms, they have been kept in the dark and fed shit. But as Richard Vize points out in the Fabian policy report, “With a mixture of mayors, combined authorities, councils and health service structures involved, it is hardly surprising that few people have a clear idea of what it all means.”

The secrecy, obfuscation, and lack of transparency, as well as the failure by the political elite of Greater Manchester in their ‘Labour one-party states’, to engage with the public and to spell out what services are going to be delivered and how, only exacerbates the problem. 

Hey! Hey! Stop the War!

  'How Many Kids Have You Killed Today?'

THE 'STOP the War Coalition' was founded in September 2001, after US President George W Bush announced a 'war on terror'.

Now 'Stop the War' has become little more than a tin pot cheer-leader for Bashar Hafez al-Assad of Syria and the former Soviet KGB operative Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; to become a smelly little orthodoxy with little moral compass.
This week a video of an encounter at a 'Stop the War' protest was shared widely online, in which the Syrian refuge, Mr Hassan Akkad, told the BBC:  'I didn't see them protesting against the chamical weapons, I didn't see them protesting against Putin bombing Syria for the last two years.
'I wanted to go to that protest and I wanted to observe.
'I went to the protest and I saw a group of 30 people with placards, not a single mention of Assad.
'All the placards are against Donald Trump and they're repeating baseless slogans with their megaphones.'

Mr. Hassan Akkad added:
"They [President's Assad's forces] have killed hundreds of thousands, we've lost our home, we were displaced, we were made refugees all because of the Assad regime," he said.
"People were tortured to death, chemical attacks, all sort of attacks barrel bombs shredding children and flattening down entire cities.'
 Hence 'bombing Assad's war machine is in our favour because that means less Syrian civilians will die, less children will die.'
After the 'Stop War' group would not let Mr Akkad speak, he said:
'I felt oppressed, it was like being back in Syria. Like how the Syrian police used to mute our voices.
'I'm not going to be silenced I have the right to say what I believe.
'I left the protest. I was angry, I was livid.'

The BBC contacted 'Stop the War' for a response.  On its Facebook page before the protest, it said:
'The Stop the War Coalition​ condemn​s Donald Trump's decision to launch attacks against Syrian targets.  
'This action will only increase the level of killing in Syria, and inflame the terrible war that has already caused untold misery for the people of the country.'

This kind of moral and intellectual bankrupcy seems to be commonplace now on the British left. They say that they are against 'intervention' but what they really mean is that they are against intervention by the West, and that they are objectively pro-Putin and objectively pro-intervention when comes to Russia and Assad.

Union Bosses Who Blackballed Their Members!

 Why hasn't McCluskey probed bent officials before?

Why didn't Mrs. Cartmail interview Whistleblower Wainwright?

Why are blacklisted workers still waiting for justice?
by Brian Bamford
***

GUARDIAN journalist. Rob Evans last Monday wrote that  'blacklisted workers want an inquiry by a legal expert to interview trade union officials and victims, and see if information was handed over deliberately.'
Now Unite, the UK's biggest trade union, is facing calls to set up an inquiry into claims that union officials gave information to a clandestine blacklisting operation funded by major firms and enabling them to deny jobs to certain workers.
Long suspected details of the alleged complicity have emerged in documents prepared for a high court action following which construction firms apologised and paid compensation totalling around £75m to 771 blacklisted workers. The evidence of the complicity of trade union officials and managers has led to a group of 41 blacklisted workers to call on Unite to commission an independent inquiry into the claims.

  Why hasn't McCluskey probed bent officials before?

The election for the new Unite General Secretary closes on the 19th, April, and the existing general secretary Len McCluskey has said that he will  'set up an independent union inquiry to investigate all evidence made available' to him of collusion by union officers in blacklisting.  But Mr. McCluskey has been the general secretary of the Unite union for years, why has it taken so long for him to offer an inquiry?  Couldn't he have done this earlier?
Meanwhile, the Unite union's acting general secretary, Gail Cartmail has said: 'Only a full public inquiry with judicial authority will fully explain the depth to which the state and employers colluded to deny construction workers employment.'
'Unite has campaigned legally, industrially and politically to win justice for blacklisted workers and to ensure the disgusting practice of blacklisting is ended once and for all. Blacklisting is an industrial crime, the blame for which lays squarely at the door of the construction companies..'
Yet, Ms Cartmail herself conducted her own investigation in 2011 on behalf of the Unite union, and on the 2nd, November 2011, this Northern Voices Blog stated that her report 'cleared the union officer':
'THE Report and investigation into 'alleged Officer collusion in Blacklisting in the construction sector' conducted by an Assistant General Secretary of Unite, Gail Cartmail, has concluded that: 'Despite considerable effort I have not discovered evidence against officers' of the union. She writes that while 'I accept that this may disappoint some activists, who are justifiably angry and who have suffered ... great injustice arising from Blacklisting', she urges that 'workers officials of the union are also entitled to dignity at work and in the absence of any proof I trust that such allegation of collusion (in Blacklisting) will now desist.'
She was telling us to 'desist'  is asking questions about collusion in 2011, but now she's calling for a public enquiry because she knows the victims of blacklisting are still disgruntled and telling people to 'desist' is not politic.

In her report in 2011 Mrs. Cartmail wrote 'Alleged collusion by union officials' seems to place great stress on the allegations of one man Mr. James Simms, who was a former employee of a predecessor union and has since been employed by Beaver Management Services Ltd and has claimed to have a 'CD-ROM with the names of union officers on it complicit in the Blacklisting of members'.  She concluded that Mr. Simms that getting information from Mr. Simms was like extracting teeth.
But Jim Simms was not the most promising whistleblower with regard to the expose of the blacklist in the British building trade.  The credit there must surely go to the former electrician and whistleblower, Alan Wainwright, not Jim Simms?

 Why didn't Ms. Cartmail interview Whistleblower Wainwright?

THE whistleblower Alan Wainwright wrote a letter to Gail Cartmail, on Monday, the 23rd, July 2012 which he has placed on his own Blog: July - alan wainwright & the construction industry blacklist - blogger www.alanwainwright.blogspot.com/2012_07_01_archive.htm : 

:
Dear Mrs Cartmail

Re Construction Industry Blacklisting

'I was the whistleblower in this matter and provided the evidence which eventually exposed this via David Clancy at the ICO in March 2009. Three years on and we now appear to be making a start at holding the companies accountable for this, but I cannot help but feel that we could have saved at least three years if Mr Simpson had acted when he first came into possession of the evidence in 2005/2006.

'I'm therefore now writing to appeal to you to investigate Derek Simpsons' lack of enthusiasm to investigate and act upon this in 2005/2006 and provide the reasons behind this...

'I've held senior positions at Crown House Engineering (National Labour Manager), Drake & Scull and Haden Young and during those periods of employment the companies paid the union subscriptions of the members as part of a benefits package. The union also received two pounds per week for every agency worker placed on the sites as part of an 'agency workers membership scheme' set up by the Luton office under Harry Hughes. This was a simple head count system and payment made monthly if I recall correctly. I understand the unions received in excess of one million pounds a year from the companies in question under these schemes at the time.

'Although Mr Simpson has now retired, I do believe he receives a handsome pension and a luxury house to live in. I cannot see how this can be justified, as in my opinion he was in a prime position to do something about this and chose not to do so. Mr Clancy had no more or no less evidence than Mr Simpson three years previous but Mr Simpson chose to do nothing about this.'

Mr. Wainwright concluded his letter:
'As you may be aware, Guney Clark Ryan are about to lodge their case to the courts. We may never get full justice for these people, but I think they are at least owed some honesty about why a major union of which many were members did nothing to help them.'

Yours sincerely

Alan Wainwright

Mrs Cartmail in her reply wrote:

 '.... The purpose of your letter was specifically in relation to what you identify as a wasted opportunity on the part of the retired Amicus/Unite General Secretary Derek Simpson who you believe should have done more arising from your correspondence in 2005/2006.

'As you point out Mr Simpson is now retired. The union has no capacity to secure Mr Simpson's cooperation in an investigation. The union recently reviewed Mr Simpson's post retirement benefits, which were subsequently adjusted to the extent that this was possible.

'I empathise with your frustration however do assure you that Unite now gives priority to representing members known to be Blacklisted and is proactively working to achieve better law.'

Kind regards

Gail Cartmail

Readers must decide for themselves why Mrs. Cartmail didn't interview a vital witness such as Mr. Alan Wainwright when she was doing her investigation for the Unite union into blacklisting in 2011?

 Why are blacklisted workers still waiting for justice?

TO better understand Gail Cartmail's growing involvement within the campaign against the blacklist, we need to understand the development of the Blacklist Support Group, and how the Rank and File construction worker's campaign began to have political impact, prominence and profile.  At some point Mrs. Cartmail recognised this and decided to assimulate herself within the workings of the Blacklist Support Group.    

This can clearly be detected in her letter responding to Alan Wainwright in 2012:

Dear Alan

'Your effort and those now organised within the Blacklist Support Group has been tremendous in exposing the practice of Blacklisting in the Construction Industry.

'Since February 2011 I have led for the union as AGS for a number of sectors including construction. Over the past 12 months I have learned about different aspects of the ICO raid of the Consulting Association, subsequent litigation and legislative changes introduced by the Labour Government. In the process I have met and come to know many workers who have been the victim of Blacklisting in the industry.

'Both Unite's predecessor unions supported numerous members complaints to their employment tribunal where their application to the ICO showed they were on the Blacklist.  We have renewed encouragement to members to bring cases forward. Unfortunately as you probably know the settlements in respect of such cases is relatively low and poor comfort to workers who struggle to find employment commensurate with their qualifications.

'Over the past we have endeavoured to campaign against Blacklisting and work with the Blacklist Support Group on a number of fronts including legal challenges on grounds of disclosure of information and human rights...'

 A very sugary response indeed, and one intended to seduce!  

Yet the truth is that the conversion of the of the Unite leadership and that of the politicians within the Labour Party to the campaign against the blacklist for those of us who stood on the lonely picket lines in Manchester, was indeed a slow uphill  process.  It was only when the Blacklist Support Group became a political bandwagon following the raid by the Information Commissioner in 2009 of the offices of the Consulting Association run by Ian Kerr that things took off.

Alan Wainwright was clearly aware of this in his correspondence with Mrs. Cartmail in 2012:
'I note your comments about the current contribution from the union, but this is simply too little too late and is perceived by some I speak to as just jumping on the bandwagon. I put it to you again that these people are at the very least owed an explanation and an apology of why a major union of which many were members did nothing to help them at the time.'

Jumping on a political bandwagon is one thing Mrs. Cartmail, delivering justice is quite another!

Balfour Beatty lined-up for Trump’s Mexican Wall

THE BLOOMBERG NEWS outlet has reported that 'Hundreds of companies have been eyeing work on President Donald Trump’s 30-foot [high] border wall with Mexico.'
Last month,  Simon Neville in the Daily Express claimed:
'BALFOUR Beatty is set to face tough questions over whether it plans to try and win work constructing President Donald Trump’s controversial wall along the US-Mexico border.'
The construction giant behind the London 2012 Olympic stadium has suffered a difficult few years, but has found significant growth in the US, which is now its biggest market.
If Balfour’s chief executive Leo Quinn does decide to try and win contracts for the wall, he could face stiff competition, especially since the President has stated he wants to favour US companies as part of his 'America First' policy.
About half of the business of Balfour Beatty is already in the USA.
Although Congress hasn’t yet worked out how to pay for it yet, but more than 375 companies have told the Trump administration they’re interested in working on the controversial border-wall project.
The Mexican cement giant Cemex SAB won’t participate, though it is well positioned to profit with plants on both sides of the border.
Neither will Vinci SA, a big French engineering company, after Chief Executive Officer Xavier Huillard cited the 'sensitivities' of employees.  Emmanuel Macron, the frontrunner for the French presidency, has warned LafargeHolcum Ltd. the world’s largest cement maker, to steer clear.  Union leaders at that company have branded the wall undemocratic.

Syria: Carry-On 'Stop the War'!

Corny Carryings-On of Stop War Coalition

Bring on the Mustard Gas Comrades!

A CRACK-POT Coalition of 'Stop the War' devotees last night ran into opposition from what the Huffington Post described as 'an enraged Syrian refugee' Hassan Akkad, who accused 'Stop the War' of trying to shut him up. 
Mr. Akkad said that he shouted 'Assad is our enemy', when he was appalled by the absence of 'a single placard or slogan' condemning the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad or indeed his Russian backers.
The highly hypocritical 'Stop the War Coalition' these days makes Donald Trump look like an enlightened Scrooge following his conversion by Little Tim, the youngest son of Bob Cratchit, in 'A Christmas Carol' by Charles Dickens.
Not since the Soviet Union in the last century served to make Capitalism, by comparison, seem positively benevolent has a political movement behaved in such a barmy way as the 'Stop the War Coalition'.
Trump commanded the missile bombing of an Assad regime air base following a nerve gas attack last Tuesday killed many civilians including 30 children.
The Stop the War Coalition is now being accused of double standards owing to its silence about the Russian interventions which helped to prop-up the Assad regime.
Last night, the 'Stop The War Coalition' was challenged on social media for choosing to demonstrate outside Downing Street as opposed to an international embassy such as the United States, Russia or Syria.

Twitter user Josh The Duke said:  'Stop the war coalition should be protesting outside Russian Embassy - not Downing Street.'

Rohullah Yakobi added:  'Stop the War Coalition to hold a demo about Syria. No, it isn't to condemn Assad's atrocities.' 

The Stop The War Coalition issued the Newsletter yesterday, which we publish below:

Stop the War Newsletter - 7 April 2017

---

London Emergency Protest Tonight Downing Street 5-7pmThe Stop the War Coalition​ condemn​s Donald Trump's decision to launch attacks against Syrian targets. This action will only increase the level of killing in Syria, and inflame the terrible war that has already caused untold misery for the people of the country.

​​This is the worst possible way to respond to the indefensible attack at Khan Sheikhun. As well as ​deepening​ the tragedy of the Syrian people, ​this utterly​ irresponsible act ​threatens to widen the war and lead the West into military confrontation with Russia. ​

​It is shameful that​ Theresa May​ has rushed to support this act by the most xenophobic and reactionary US president in history. ​

​Stop the War calls for protests today against th​is​ or any further attacks and against British support or participation. The protest in London will take place today at​ Downing Street​ from 5 to 7pm.

British Syndicalism Talk in Wakefield

Comrades
British syndicalism emerged in the years after 1900 in response, Holton (1976) says, to "urgent economic and political problems facing the working class."
Firstly, British capitalism was still struggling -despite the end of the "Great Depression"- and real wages fell some 10% between 1900 and 1912.
Secondly, capitalist industry was increasingly concentrated.  Businesses were amalgamating.  Employers associations were being set up.  "Federated capital" was more visible (Holton 1976).
Thirdly, technological change was displacing/downgrading certain craft skills.
And finally labour leaders were increasingly being incorporated into state sponsored collective bargaining structures and into the bourgeois parliamentary system.  Trade union officials now seemed increasingly remote from the rank and file.  And Lloyd George would boast in 1912 that parliamentary socialists were the "best policemen" when it came to managing and diffusing industrial unrest.
Face with all this -falling wages, deskilling, larger units of capitalist production and conservatism on the part of traditional labour leaders- workers began to look beyond sectionalism and reformism to class unity, direct action and industrial unionism.
This syndicalist sentiment was influenced by what had been going on in Europe, the US and Australia.  But it also drew from domestic traditions of workplace militancy and what Holton (1976) describes as "anti-State socialism."
On Saturday 13 May at 1pm at the Red Shed, Vicarage Street, Wakefield WF1, the Wakefield Socialist History Group are holding an event, SYNDICALISM AND THE GREAT UNREST.  The speakers are Robin Stocks and Alan Brooke.  Other speakers tbc. The chair is Adrian Cruden.  Admission is free and all are welcome.  A free light buffet will be provided.

Fraternally

Alan Stewart

Convenor, Wakefield Socialist History Group

Tribute to Toilet Matters & Simon Danczuk MP

MARK Duell for the Mail-On-Line on the 21st, February 2017, reported on how a toilet block at a school in Gambia came to be named and dedicated to the notorious Rochdale MP, Simon Danczuk.  Below John Walker covers the story as it has developed.

April 2017 Newsletter: Getting bogged down in toilet matters:

As we reported in our newsletter of October last year (see here), following a some dealings with Simon Danczuk, the MP for Rochdale over the last few years, we decided to name a toilet block in the senior secondary school after him.

The ceremony was covered by the Mail-On-Line (see here for full details and below for some of it) in February this year, and we reproduce, below some of their extensive coverage.

We are delighted to say that these facilities are now up and running and much appreciated by the staff and students, alike, at Sohm Senior Secondary school.

Ok, we'll leave out the endless puns.

We are pleased to report that we "sold" the story to the Mail-On-line, through a news agency and that money received will help us fix more school toilets in the village.

For the coming year, the Lower Basic school in the village has asked us to refurbish their toilets - for boys, girls and staff.  The photos tell their own story of how much this restoration is needed.  These three tiny blocks provide toilets for over 400 students and 25 staff.

This year's funding project

They are clearly insanitary and, until March this year, were nowhere near running water.

The concrete bases of the blocks have cracked and the ground underneath the blocks are home to snakes - particularly in the rainy season in the country (summer and autumn), with the result that many pupils and staff, alike, refuse to use them.

Roof and doors blown off  during rainy season

The school's request for assistance is modest. We are committed to working in partnership with our colleagues from Jersey to: restore and recent the concrete bases and erect new doors and roofs, where necessary.

Girls' toilet - snakes nest  below the concrete slab.  200 girls only toilet at the school

Fortunately, because of a water supply project the Jersey Overseas Aid Commission has funded, a new standpipe was erected close to these outside toilet blocks in March this year, to try and address some of the sanitary issues associated with them.

Roofless staff toilets

Given the success of the naming of the Simon Danczuk block, we would look sympathetically on bids to rename any of these three blocks after other people, in return for a suitable donation.  

Water now running near toilets,  for better sanitation

We will of course be willing to supply photographs of the unveiling of the appropriately named facilities to any sponsor.  Just contact us at: John@SohmSchoolSupport.org.uk if you are interested in this nomination facility!

Whose name would you like to  adorn this fine facility  - when renovated, of course!

John Walker 07954 153 305 Gambia stuff: www.SohmSchoolsSupport.org.uk @GambiaSchools Forest Gate stuff: www.E7-NowAndThen.org, @E7_NowAndThen

---

BB