John McDonnell Meeting in Norwich

Please see below report from Daniel Morley SYN member.

Massive John McDonnell Meeting in Norwich

An unprecedented turnout of 100+ students and trade unionists welcomed John McDonnell to Norwich and UEA on an otherwise dreary Friday evening on 9th February, rewarding and surprising in equal measure the weeks of hard work from students to promote the event and campaign.

The large turnout from what is an extremely ‘depoliticised’ campus bearing a dearth of socialist ideas and consciousness clearly demonstrated that not only are the youth not apathetic and resolutely opposed to all things Labour Party, but that the only way to effectively move students politically is in reference to the labour movement, and that the only way to renew the labour party is through the left wing.

The meeting had long been planned since the conception of John’s campaign for leadership in the summer. A term of consistent work by members of the newly formed UEA Socialist Society and Socialist Youth Network has slowly raised the banner and ideas of socialism and John’s campaign.

The hard work has evidently paid off, particularly in the two weeks of flyering preceding the meeting, and has hopefully led to a raising of profile and reputation of not only socialism but the Socialist Youth Network.

A series of meetings on John McDonnell, the Labour Movement and a resolution in the student union council formed the run up to John’s appearance itself.John was only able to speak to students for an hour as he had to rush off to another meeting at the local Labour Party, which was also highly successful. John outlined the background to his campaign, the history of New Labour and how this was consistently alienating Labour’s support base, highlighting the fear that the party is sleepwalking into another Tory government.

He also spoke of policies such as nationalisation under workers control. The key topic addressed by members of the audience in both meetings was over how to actually mobilise support for a socialist campaign.
John responded by saying that the social base was there, and that our task was to bring in those groups that Blairism has consistently alienated, i.e. the trade unionists, public sector workers and working class as a whole, especially the un-unionised immigrant workers.

Only through organising an effective grass roots working class campaign can we force the media to pay any attention to his campaign.The massive turnout, especially from the youth, and the campaign to get people to join the party to vote for John highlights the fact that the only way to reinvigorate the party is through socialism and the rank and file movement.
While the Labour Party Blairites and Tories and Liberals hold their meetings behind closed doors, terrified of openly taking their campaigns and ideas and testing them against the mood of the public in open meetings, the socialists emphatically and confidently build for large open, public meetings as a means of discussion and to bring ordinary people into our campaigns.

Imagine Brown touring the country, hosting huge meetings on the platform of a progressive, confident and positive campaign to bring the masses into the party to vote for his campaign. It would never happen!

We must continue to build on the grass roots success of such meetings and bring as many ordinary and working class people into the party on the basis of John’s campaign.
We will be manning a stall in Norwich town centre on Saturday 17th February to meet even more people.
The reinvigoration of the Labour Party is only achievable on the basis of socialist ideas! Participation in politics and society is only achievable through socialism!

Involvment in the Labour Party

Motion one that we passed at SYN Conference calls on SYN to " encourage all socialists and trade unionsists to join the labour party"

To that end Vino has kindly drafted a guide to Labour Party structures to help you all on your way to becoming budding Labour party activists.
Enjoy :)

Guide to Labour Party structures

When you join the Labour Party, which can easily be done via the http://www.labour.org.uk/ website, you will get a letter from Head Office giving you a membership card with your membership number on it.

The card should also say what CLP (constituency Labour Party) you are in. Each parliamentary constituency has its own CLP. In addition, the letter that you get with your membership card should say who the CLP secretary is. This is an ordinary member who has been elected or volunteered to do the job of taking notes at CLP meetings, advertising them etc.

Most constituencies are divided into branches. A branch consists of one or more local council wards. The Branch Labour Party (BLP) is the most local unit of Labour Party organisation.

If you ring the CLP secretary or other contact number given on the introductory letter, they will be able to tell you what branch you are in and when and where its meetings are.

Each BLP has a chair, a secretary, a treasurer and normally a youth officer, women’s officer, membership secretary and several other posts. They are called ‘branch officers’. These positions are normally not particularly contested and, if you want to get involved, it is likely there will be an officer vacancy that you can take up.

Most CLPs have a General Committee (GC) and an Executive Committee (EC). The GC is the most powerful body in the constituency party and it normally plays the main role in electing a chair and secretary for the CLP and choosing the Labour candidate for MP for the constituency. Branches select the candidates for local council positions.

Each GC is made up of delegates from the branches in the constituency. Normally, branches tend to send one man and one woman, although larger branches can send more. Branches also tend to send 1 delegate to the EC. The EC is made of 1 delegate from each branch and the CLP Chair, Secretary, Treasurer etc – who were elected by the GC.

So, if you wish to get involved at the constituency level, you can go as a delegate from your BLP to GC meetings. In Labour seats, these may be attended from time to time by the local MP, which will give you a chance to hear his/her parliamentary report and perhaps question them.
Additionally, the Labour Party does have other committees and structures, notably a Local Government Committee to deal with local council matters, but these are secondary to the role of the CLP and the Branch as the basic levels of Labour Party organisation from the point of view of the ordinary member

Trade unions4 john - Report

More than 130 trade union activists met at Friends Meeting House for the Trade Unionists 4 John rally initiated by the London Region of the AMICUS Unity Gazette and chaired on behalf of the Gazette by Ted Knight.

Speakers from the platform started with Gill George from the AMICUS NEC, speaking in a personal capacity, who explained why she supported John from the perspective of being a trade union activist outside the Labour Party but nevertheless part of the Labour movement. This point of view was repeated by a minority of later contributors from the floor of the meeting.

Gill was followed by Gary Heather speaking on behalf of the Communication Workers Union (CWU) Broad Left, who explained the work being done in that union to build awareness of and support for John’s leadership challenge. Gary explained how, as a Labour Party member and union activist, he was pleased to be able to support a leadership candidate who not only opposed privatisation but also supported public ownership of privatised industries such as telecoms.

I was the third speaker, speaking on behalf of UNISON United Left and I echoed support for John’s opposition to privatisation and explained the impact which John’s campaign was having in mobilising young trade unionists.
While nearly one in five of the workforce are young workers only one in twenty trade unionists are young, with young people focusing on single issue politics.
I went onto say how, John’s campaign had led to the formation of the Socialist Youth Network of young Labour Party and trade union activists which would provide a continuing platform for organisation and campaigning.
I spoke about the need for us to organise through the broad left groups because the leadership of the bnig4 are too timid to get on board for a serious challenge - Dave Prentis (General Secretary of UNISON) told Tribune at christams that what he hoped for in 2007 was a smooth transitionto a new labour leader!

I was extremely pleased to see no less than 15 SYN'ers in the meeting with more i am told in the meeting downstairs on Palestine - so well done us :)


Geoff Martinof Health Emergency was the next speaker. Geoff focused upon the impact of Government policy on health workers and the anger and hostility which this was provoking. He pointed out that morale in the health service was now lower even than under the Tories but that John’s campaign could provide a focus for this anger.

The final platform speaker was John McDonnell himself, who warned that the departure of Tony Blair could be hastened by the activities of the Metropolitan Police. John spoke about his campaign but in particular focused upon the strong support he was receiving from rank and file organisations in the trade unions, which he contrasted with the downright opposition of some General Secretaries. He had just come from a meeting of the UNISON Parliamentary Group at which he had been given a UNISON Labour Link magazine, which had a story on the labour leadership showing pictures of leadership and deputy leadership candidates but excluding himself - referring back to my point that the leaders of the big 4 are too timid to get on board for a serious challenge! John said some MP's and leaders of Trade unions are living in Cukoo land not in the real world - we need to make them come back to reality!

In a theme that he returned to in his closing remarks, John pointed out that the reason for this hostility was the same as the reason for the media blackout on the campaign – which was that a socialist challenge for the Labour leadership was a threat to all sections of the establishment (including within the Labour movement).

Wide ranging contributions from the floor were started with two contributions from PCS activists concerning the strike action due for 31 January. Other speakers came from AMICUS, CWU, UNISON, PCS, RMT and the POA (whose delegates brought greetings from General Secretary Brian Caton who was facing possible imprisonment for standing up for his members’ rights).

Paul Mackney, retiring joint General Secretary of UCU spoke from the floor and to much amusement set out the reasons for not supporting John – “He doesn’t accept the modernisation agenda, he doesn’t support neo-endogenous growth theory and he isn’t even corrupt. You won’t get any seats in the House of Lords from him!”

The meeting was concluded by impromptu greetings from Tony Benn, who had arrived without expecting to speak but rose to the occasion, expressing warm support for John and warning that if Labour MPs failed to allow a contest for Labour leader it could come to be the final act in New Labour’s destruction of the Labour Party.

John McDonnell closed the meeting with a reminder to activists to lobby MPs to use their nomination rights to ensure that we have a candidate on the ballot paper for Labour leader who will support trade union policies

All in all a very impressive meeting people seem really fired up and ready to go - all of us now need to put as much pressure on members of the PLP to nominate John - and not just your own MP - as Unionists you can legitimately contact those MP's that have links with whichever union your in and put pressure on them to back John as well.

I've heard John speak a lot over the last 6 or 7 months but I must say that was one of the best from him - i've never before seen him so angry and so up for this challenge.

The meeting concluded at 9.30 and John had to run straight off to do News at 10 *which sadly I missed cos I was in the pub by then having a vodka!)

So SYN'ers this is it the fight for our labour party and movement is on!

Feminists4John McDonnell

A couple of things to bring to your attention

1 -FEMINISTS4JOHN

Please see below from Mary Partington SYN's womens Officer on Feminsts4John

2 - Don't forget the TU4John meeting tomorrow night.

It would be great to have lots of SYN input into both.

Dear Friend,

From the very beginning when John McDonnell MP first announced his bid for the Labour Leadership, we made it clear that this campaign is about encouraging political participation and providing a voice to sections of our society who have felt alienated and excluded from politics. We have been absolutely overwhelmed with support since the launch of the campaign, as it inclusive and far-reaching.

We are all aware that women, although making up over fifty percent of our society, are severely under-represented in political activism and decision making. Far too often feminism slips off the agenda. It is now important to fully establish the feminist program within the John4Leader campaign, making sure that anti-sexism and issues that particularly affect women are at the forefront of political debate, encouraging more female activists to get involved.

John’s campaign is about reclaiming the Labour Party as a democratic voice for working people including the women who are struggling in low paid jobs; the women who have been let down by insufficient welfare provision; the female trade unionists who have stood up for their rights; women who want a good education; women who have suffered unacceptable violence; women experiencing racism; women who believe in their right to control their own bodies. Most of all FEMINISTS4JOHN is about hearing the voices all of these women and showing that another world is really possible.

If you are fed up with being under-represented, are tired of being ignored, believe that feminism is essential to the labour movement then please contact the campaign to offer your ideas and skills.

Warm regards

Mary Partington
www.john4leader.org.uk

Another World Is Possible

This war must end

Today I spoke at the School Students Against War Conference on behalf of Labour Against The War. SSAW are a pretty remarkable organisation - they're completely run by school students and have organised antiwar school walkouts across the country. A whole new generation of lifelong activists is being trained up by organisations such as SSAW - and that's something that should give our movement reasons for optimism.

As the Conference reminded me, the war in Iraq radicalised thousands of young people. Huge numbers of us took to the streets, not least on that cold Saturday back in February 2003. The antiwar movement has dispelled the myth that today's young people have become somehow depoliticised. The problem is, of course, that Blairism has so associated the Labour party with war (among so many other things) that, up until now, most young lefties would not have dreamt of joining the party. Let's be honest: if you're a young, idealistic activist committed to fighting for peace and justice, why would you join a party whose leadership has allied with the most rightwing American regime in modern history to bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age? Such is the tragic damage that New Labour has done to our party: after all, these are the very young people who would almost instinctively have joined the party a generation ago.

That's why this Conference gave me such hope. When I raised the suggestion of joining the party in order to support an antiwar candidate for the Labour leadership, I expected hisses and boos. Instead, there was applause at the idea. Several speakers from the floor made the same suggestion. This alone is evidence of the success of John McDonnell's leadership campaign. Young activists who just a few months ago would have preferred to stick burning matches in their eyes than fill in a Labour party membership form are now enthusiastically joining. If the Labour party is to exist in any meaningful sense in the years to come - and if the current terminal decline in membership is to be reversed - then we depend on winning over such inspirational, dedicated young activists.

Below is a summary of the speech I gave on the war on terror at home:

Over the past few years, the rulers of Britain and the United States have used the atrocities of September 11th and July 7th to justify an onslaught against civil liberties and rights that people have struggled and fought for over the centuries. What we've seen over the past few years is a concerted effort by New Labour to strip us of basic democratic rights.

Attacks on civil rights are not new. For example, Thatcher and the Tories stripped working people of their rights in the 80s, leaving British workers with fewer rights than anywhere else in the Western world.

Since September 11th, we've seen a series of legislation taking away our rights and giving more power to the state. In 2001, for example, new laws allowed foreigners to be detailed as terrorist suspects indefinitely. In 2003, the time that a terrorist suspect could be detained was doubled to 14 days. In 2005, control orders of alleged terror suspects were introduced – which effectively grant the ability to place people under house arrest without charge.

Last year, laws were passed allowing the state to arrest people for supposedly "glorifying" terrorism. New Labour pushed to increase the time that terrorist suspects could be held without charge to 90 days – effectively internment, and a level which would have left us with the same level as South Africa under apartheid. The government were defeated, but still managed to get away with 28 days.

Anti-terrorism laws have been used to routinely harass peaceful protesters. Most famously, Walter Wolfgang was held by police under the Terrorism Act 2000 for heckling Jack Straw at Labour Party Conference. The idea that an 80 year old pensioner could be a terrorist is of course ridiculous – as the police well know. At the same conference, hundreds of others were stopped under the Act.

As the war against Iraq approached, the police arrested protestors at the Fairford military base nearly a thousand times – purely to intimidate and harrass anti-war activists.

New Labour is also intent on introducing ID cards – which will give the state a register with details of the entire British public,
effectively putting us under lifelong surveillance at great cost.

As we all know, these attacks on civil liberties have disproportionately attacked Muslims. Since September 11th, we've seen a tide of Islamophobia whipped up by the tabloid media. At the same time, the state's harassment of Muslims and more broadly Asians has increased. After the July 7th attacks, stop-and-search of Asians increased twelve fold.

We witnessed the horrific assassination of Charles de Menezes by the police on July 22nd 2005 – who then lied through their back teeth about the events leading up to the shooting. We've also seen, for example, the Forrest Gate raid – where the police shot an innocent man and dozens of cops farcically spent a week searching a tiny house for a supposed chemical weapon.

And of course, there's Belmarsh – the British Guantanamo – where people are held without charge and are going literally insane because of their circumstances.

These attacks on civil liberties and rights are not new. Throughout history, states have used the supposed existence of a national emergency to justify attacking people's basic rights.

New Labour claims that these attacks are making Britain safer. Nothing could be further from the truth. At a time when Muslims are demonised in the press, at a time when they continue to languish in overwhelming poverty and suffer disproportionately from unemployment, these attacks on their rights – such as humiliating stop-and-searches – only further radicalise parts of the Muslim community. Indeed, it deepens the feeling of many young working class Muslims that the British state is at war with Muslims generally.

The real reasons behind terrorism are clear. New Labour's murderous foreign policy has radicalised an entire generation. In the past few years, New Labour has participated in the invasion of Afghanistan, stood by Israel in its brutal occupation of Palestine, tacitly supported its barbaric invasion of the Lebanon, and of course joined the invasion of Iraq. Young Muslims have been radicalised by the manifest injustice, and indeed terrorism of British foreign policy – in combination with other reasons, like poverty, unemployment, and a rising tide of hatred against Muslims.

The terrible truth is this – so long as the current British foreign policy remains, thousands more will die abroad and, undoubtedly, here. Attacks on civil liberties are not the solution - a change in foreign policy is.

Nothing has done more to boost international terrorism than the war against Iraq. Bush and Blair remain al-Qaeda's most important recruiting sergeants. Part of the justification for attacking Iraq was that al-Qaeda had a presence there – a lie. Following the invasion, we can now be in no doubt that Iraq is crawling with al-Qaeda – some of whom will no doubt attempt to strike Britain one day.

I also want to turn to the sheer hypocrisy of Western imperialism. We should all condemn terrorism wherever it happens. The deaths of 52 innocent civilians on July 7th was a terrible crime. September 11th – and the murder of 3,000 innocent civilians – was again a disgusting act of terrorism we should all condemn in the strongest possible terms.

But what about the even bloodier acts of Western terrorism? Before September 11th, around a million Iraqis had been killed because of Western sanctions. Since the invasion of Iraq, according to the Lancet, 655,000 Iraqis have been slaughtered. Furthermore, thousands of Palestinians have been murdered by Western ally Israel.

American terrorism has been responsible for the deaths of literally millions of civilians since World War II. The killing fields of Vietnam and Southeast Asia, Central and South America, and the Middle East, testify to that.

To end with, I want to plug John McDonnell's campaign. John is standing for the Labour leadership against New Labour. He is committed to fighting against the so-called War on Terror both at home and abroad. He will restore all the civil liberties taken away by New Labour. He will end the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and stand against Israeli aggression in the Middle East – which, as we know, are the main causes of terrorism. A victory for John will mean peace in the Middle East, the restoration of our civil rights, and the end of Britain's status as an international terror target.

Therefore – and I know this controversial – I urge all of you to join the Labour party, if only to have a vote for a candidate who will end this murderous war. Thank you.

Brown is the new blue

It's funny what people will delude themselves into believing. Ever since the Tories were booted out of office back in 1997, a myth has persisted that a Brown premiership will somehow represent some sort of break with Blairism. An entire industry seems to have been created by the British media dedicated to analysing "codewords" uttered by Brown which reveal his supposed real intentions when (if) elected. A coalition of so-called "Brownites" has long argued that Brown's leadership will represent a real change - either because of naivety, sycophancy or desperation.

You've got to pity Brown. What does the co-founder of New Labour have to do to convince people that he is wedded to the same neo-liberal, pro-war agenda as Blair? Brown himself is more than happy to brag about. Take this quote boasting about his neo-liberal credentials:

"I have introduced most of the Private Finance Initiative, sold off air traffic control, made a controversial decision on the London Underground, set up the Gershon review to sack or make redundant 80,000 civil servants, made the Bank of England independent and introduced the most widespread competition reforms this country has ever seen."

Indeed, Brown is the architect of New Labour's privatisation agenda. Last year, Brown announced a £26bn expansion of PFI across 200 public sector projects. It's PFI that has allowed private contractors to milk our public services dry. Even before the current crisis, PFI was ravaging the NHS: the first wave of PFI schools suffered bed reductions averaging 30% and staffing level cuts of 25%.

The "contoversial decision on the London Underground" was the disastrous decision to part-privatise it. As he boasted, it was his initiative to massacre civil servant jobs - a decision he announced to Parliament without any consultation with the workers he was sacking.

In the one major policy dispute between Blair and Brown since 1997 - over pensions - Brown attacked Blair from the right. While even Blair pledged support for the proposal to re-establish the link between earnings and pensions (granted that this was along with a rise in the retirement age), Brown opposed the policy on grounds of “affordability”. Despite an eventual agreement between them, which allowed the Government to announce its response to Turner, there is widespread suspicion that Brown will renege on the supposed deal as soon as he is installed in Number 10.

Since his pledge last year to run a Blairite administration if he becomes party leader, Brown has veered to the right with increasing confidence. He supports another attempt to introduce de facto internment through 90 days detention. He has made it known that he is willing to review the £3,000 cap on annual tuition fees for students – which, if lifted, would open the floodgates to an internal market in higher education.

Last year he echoed Margaret Thatcher’s call for a “property-owning democracy” when he described his vision to “build a home-owning, asset-owning democracy.” No wonder the Washington Post on 14th May said to him bluntly: “You don’t sound like the socialist you are portrayed to be.” His response was clear: “I’m a free trader. I’m pro-open markets,” adding that “the economy that I admire most is the American economy.” This echoed many earlier comments in which Brown has professed his admiration for what he regards as the more entrepreneurial US economy while repeatedly calling for Europe to “adjust its social model to combine flexibility with fairness” through “wholesale economic reform.”

There are sinister signs that Brown is willing to pander to racist prejudices in order to win power. As well as some of the empty jingoistic policies he has floated, such as the establishment of a ‘British day’, he argued on Radio 4’s Today that “people who come into this country, who are part of our community, should play by the rules. I think learning English is part of that… I would insist on large numbers of people who have refused to learn our language that they must do so.”

And, of course, Brown is committed to wasting £25bn on Trident. Not only did he wholeheartedly support the war in Iraq, but he also committed Britain to yet more American-led wars - while in the same breath claiming Gandhi as one of his chief inspirations.

It's clear that the notion Brown will represent any shift to the left is, frankly, wacky at best. A vote for Brown will mean a vote for more privatisation, more wars, and more cuts. That's why I'm proud that SYN unanimously backed John McDonnell's campaign for the leadership. Indeed, a vote for John will be a vote for peace, workers' rights, free education, and publicly-funded democratically run public services.

It's time those in the labour movement still backing Brown to decide whether they're happy voting for a candidate who opposes Labour party and trade union policies - or a candidate who has spent his entire political career campaigning for those policies. So, who's it going to be?

Ruth Kelly - isn't it time she was sacked?

Ruth Kelly doesn't seem to have understood her ministerial brief. You see, her position entails arguing for equalities. As it turns out, she's become the Cabinet's chief advocate against equalities. I'm sure George Orwell would be amused.

See here for the story in the Guardian

Something you can do about it.....

Ask your MP to sign EDM 142!!!! (details below)

Reports out today suggest that Ruth Kelly is close to promising that the new regulations on sexual orientation discrimination in goods, facilities and services will have exemptions for religious adoption agencies.

The Government is being lobbied heavily and MPs are receiving sackloads of letters from religious groups calling for the right to discriminate against lesbian, gay and bisexual people. MPs need to hear from those of us who want an end to such prejudice and discrimination. The exemptions being called for will mean LGBT people could be turned away from hotels, guest houses, soup kitchens and other services. We have fought so hard over the past three years on this issue; please ensure that you act today to preserve the rights of LGBT people to live their daily lives free from discrimination and harassment.

Act now to save these regulations!
Ask your MP to sign EDM 142

Desmond Turner MP has tabled Early Day Motion 142 on the subject, asking the Government to ensure that these regulations are passed in full, with only a doctrinal exemption. So far it has 114 signatures; it needs many more to get the attention of ministers. Have a look at the EDM here: http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=31712&SESSION=885 .
Please urge your MP to sign the EDM. You can find out who your MP is by going to the website www.theyworkforyou.com and entering your postcode.

Sign the petition on the Prime Minister's web site
Please also sign the petition on the PM's website, which you can access by following this link: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/GSFRegs/. Don't forget to confirm your signature when requested, otherwise it won't count!

Write to your MP
It' s always best to write a letter in your own words. However you can use the letter below as a template if you're pushed for time.
{insert name} MP
House of Commons
Westminster
London SW1A 0AA
Dear {Insert name}
Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations
I am writing to express my support for robust legislation banning discrimination against lesbian, gay and bisexual people in the provision of goods and services.
I welcome Part 3 of the Equality Act 2006, which outlaws discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation in the provision of goods, facilities and services. However I am concerned that further exemptions to the regulations beyond the doctrinal exemption already proposed by the Government would themselves be discriminatory.
I also welcome the Northern Ireland Regulations and urge the Government to take the same approach for the rest of the UK - that any exemptions should only be for internal doctrinal matters such as baptism and confirmation. It should not be lawful to refuse lesbian, gay and bisexual people services offered to the public such as hospices, schools and adoption services.
Any watering down of these regulations would only serve as a green light for discrimination and would not deliver for lesbian, gay and bisexual people what religious groups and others already are entitled to.
Please pass on my views to the Government and let me know your views on this matter.
Yours sincerely
{Insert name}