10,000 Join RESPECT

[Udo Erasmus]

My goodness, are these people mad? a major housing crisis, welfare cuts, manufacturing going down the pan, pensioners about to die of the cold again, the NHS in crisis, i could go on, and they see the (genuine) problems a small minority has as the main political issue. Perhaps if they tackled the former there would be less of the latter, though realistically they (the SWP/Respect are marginal at most.

Our rulers use racism to divide the working class, therefore a working class movement that ignores racism cuts it's own throat and is less effective.

Out of interest, in the area where Respect has had the greatest success - the poorest borough in London - Tower Hamlets, Defending council housing has been one of it's major campaigns and was a key issue on which the local elections were fought.

A local Respect councillor recently listed what Respect has been campaigning on:


Respect in Tower Hamlets:
Supported leaseholders demanding a fair deal at their July AGM, and voted for a freeze on service charge increases in September

Is working to bring Crossrail campaigners together across the borough to oppose digging and dumping in Bow, Stepney, Spitalfields and Whitechapel

Took direct action to stop unlawful building on the Crossways estate in Bromley by Bow and backed residents to stop the Council giving back-dated planning permission

Took legal action with others to stop PFI-developers demolishing a much-loved school building

Challenges Council leaders to deliver on election promises on Cheviot House, and a borough Cemetery

Opposed privatisation of youth services

Launched a campaign to Save Cheviot House.

Highlighted the shameful poverty wages of those providing key council services, and is campaigning with London Citizens organisation and unions for a decent Living Wage

Is pushing for Tower Hamlets to become a 'Beacon of Peace' borough and led 'Time to Go' protest

Organised with tenants on Collingwood, Locksley, Ocean, Boundary and Cleveland estates to stop privatisation and demand Council carries out improvements

Is challenging the misconduct of ballots and dirty tricks that discredit transfers of housing estates

Backed the campaign to highlight the plight of Palestinians and to twin Tower Hamlets with Jenin

Since May 4th, the rules of the game have changed. The days when New Labour could drive through privatisation policies without resistance are over. Respect Councillors will work tirelessly to represent local people and our community. We will stand up for the values that New Labour left behind.

New Labour have failed the people of Tower Hamlets.
Their scandals include:

The 'disposal' of millions of pounds worth of public assets - town halls, local housing offices, public libraries, land and the biggest give-away of all: tens of thousands of council homes. Where has all the money gone from these valuable assets?

Encouraging the wanton use of private consultants, at a cost of millions of pounds to local people– while capable local graduates are denied jobs

Shamefully running down and destroying affordable, secure rented housing, while allowing luxury housing developments local people can't afford, often on public land. There are LESS council and housing association homes for rent now that ten years ago when New Labour took over

The second worst record of any Council for recycling – despite the urgent need for action to reduce rubbish dumped in landfill sites and better protect the future of the earth we share.

Avoiding public debate and scrutiny. In recent months they have manipulated procedures to try and avoid debate on major important questions concerning Leaseholders, Housing and other key matters

For all this they have paid the chief executive a staggering and obscene £189,000 a year (excluding pensions). There is no justification for anyone earning this kind of money, least of all while serving the people of Tower Hamlets where the average annual household income is below £15,000.

Campaign for a Living Wage
Respect is working with the East London Citizens Organisation (TELCO) and local trade unions to win a Living Wage for all Council workers, including sub-contractors. Nursery workers, street cleaners, recycling staff and home carers must be paid at least £7.05 an hour. Local employers, including banks and Queen Mary College, have signed up to the Living Wage, but disgracefully, New Labour Tower Hamlets Council is dragging its feet – even after Labour Mayor Ken Livingstone supported the campaign. But they could afford to pay ex-Council Chief Executive Christine Gilbert £180,000 a year, Respect says the money is there: it's time to pay a decent wage for all and especially those who provide our vital public services."

 

[poster342002]

I'd guess that the councillors would say they were people who oppose privatisation, racism and war.

What are they in favour of?

 

[Udo Erasmus]

What are they in favour of?

If they are against privatisation, racism & war then presumably they would be for democratic control of areas of the economy, workers unity & peace!!

 

[mutley]

What are they in favour of?

public services, unity and equality, and peace.

Also see Udo's post above

 

[Udo Erasmus]

RESPECT's main activity recently has been organising the biggest rank and file conference of trade unionists in recent history that launched a workers charter:

The Workers Charter

For more than a generation workers have faced an onslaught on their jobs, wages, conditions and trade union rights. Privatisation and deregulation have been implemented by both Conservative and New Labour governments. The early 21st century has seen a rebirth of radicalism on a global scale. Now is the time for trade unionists to rebuild their organisations and recommit themselves to defend working peoples’ livelihoods and rights.

The Workers Charter:

*The right to a job that pays a living wage and gives us time with our families and communities. The automatic right to union recognition and full employment rights from the first day or work.
*The right to equal pay and conditions for women, ethnic minorities, youth, migrant and casual workers. The right to a living minimum wage.
*The right to free public healthcare, welfare and education, and to a liveable pension.
*The right to decent public housing or to private housing without crippling mortgages and rents.
*The right to public control of all vital public service and utilities.
*The right to protect our own health and safety and our environment from corporate greed.
*The right to express our personal identity free from discrimination.
*The right to strike in defence of our interests and to campaign for the repeal of the Tory anti-union laws, including support for the defiance of those laws. The right to be able to take secondary, solidarity strike action without the threat of legal action.
*The right to organise for the transfer of wealth and power from the haves to the have-nots, partly through severe taxation of multinational corporations or their dismantling.
*The right to unite with workers worldwide against corporate globalisation and war.

Our immediate campaigning priorities will be:


T*o organise lobbies of MPs in favour of the Trade Union Freedom Bill. To support any group of workers who take action which is in defiance of the anti-union laws and call on their trade unions not to repudiate their action.
*To organise in support of the Public Services not Private Profit initiative.
*To campaign in defence of the NHS free of private finance initiatives and contracting out. To demand the TUC name a day for a national demonstration in defence of the NHS to take place early next year and, if they fail to do so, to support initiatives for a national demonstration from grassroots health activists.
*To organise a Trade Union Solidarity delegation to Venezuela

 

[jackdoor]

RESPECT's main activity recently has been organising the biggest rank and file conference of trade unionists in recent history that launched a workers charter:

Back in the real world there are a few objective reports of the conference on Dave Ossler's Blog http://davespartblog.blogspot.com/

 

[jackdoor]

Back in the real world there are a few objective reports of the conference on Dave Ossler's Blog http://davespartblog.blogspot.com/[/QUOTE]

Yes it was dire. Stage managed plenaries and a speakers slip systm so the SWP could halt any real debate. Nothing organisational. We might was well have had a half hour rally and chanted we love being in a union and gone home to watch the rugby. I hear the All Blacks were brilliant.

A total waste of my time and my union branch's money.
Sandra | 11.14.06 - 8:34 am | #

Reinforcing what Jim said, it's notable how few actual union branches sponsored it - looks like a bit of a non starter to me.
voltaires_priest | Homepage | 11.14.06 - 9:

 

[Das Uberdog]

I've been looking for some other reports of the conference.

To be honest, I think it deserves a seperate thread and it's own discussion as to whether or not it was a successful tactic. I would not hesitate to believe that it may not have been the sterling success which the Respect website heralds it to be, but then again - the Respect website is only intended, after all, to contain party political propaganda for gearing people up to elections...

I think it needed to be tried, and if it wasn't fabulous, then we should try again until we get it right.

 

[Udo Erasmus]

I've been looking for some other reports of the conference.

To be honest, I think it deserves a seperate thread and it's own discussion as to whether or not it was a successful tactic. I would not hesitate to believe that it may not have been the sterling success which the Respect website heralds it to be, but then again - the Respect website is only intended, after all, to contain party political propaganda for gearing people up to elections...

I think it needed to be tried, and if it wasn't fabulous, then we should try again until we get it right.

There is another thread on the announce and protests section:
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=183075
I should note that 2 of the commentators quoted are well known as opponents of Respect.
I am not sure how these reports are objective any more than any other reports? And your favourite one is by a well known racist and campaigner in support of Israeli apartheid!

 

[Das Uberdog]

My favourite?

 

[jackdoor]

I think it needed to be tried, and if it wasn't fabulous, then we should try again until we get it right.[/QUOTE]

it has been tried on a few occasions using the same model, first under the SWp controlled socialist alliance then a previous Respect sponsored trade union conference. All big events but nothing ever comes from it. Respect/SWP are unable to tolerate any genuine debate therefore any so called conference organised by them is tightly stage managed to avoid disent. The RMT conference had far more potential but seems to have stalled at the present time.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Upwards of 700 attended the Respect (SWP)-organised conference for all or most of the day. I suspect that the SWP will claim more than 1,000.

Obviously (and not surprisingly), it was much larger than the RMT stewards' movement event of a fortnight before, but smaller than the Socialist Alliance-initiated trade union conference, focused on union political funds at the start of the decade.

Similarly also as to be expected it was less democratic than either. The conference was managed in a less heavy-handed but not dissimilar way from the SWP's Marxism. There were stewards in specially produced T-shirts pacing the floor distributing and collecting speakers' slips - Sue Bond, the Vice-President of PCS, chaired and my rough guess is that SWP members and fellow travellers accounted for more than half those in attendance and an even higher proportion of speakers taken from the floor. The general tenor of the day was a rather unfocused mish-mash with variable quality speeches from the top table, the occasional speech from the floor about a current dispute and more or less interesting anecdotes from people's workplaces.

I rather doubt that the Advertising Standards Authority consider the veracity of claims on promotional material for "far left" conferences, but given the tone of several conservations I overheard by the afternoon, I had the impression that many would have referred Respect to the ASA for promoting the event as "Organising Fighting Unions".

The discussion document for the day, the "Workers' Charter", was open to amendment, though a Conference Arrangements Committee (CAC) of Respect Coalition members decided what was incorporated, what was up for debate and what was ruled beyond the pale - in practice, the Workers Power "alternative." One of WPs key points, however, was practically identical to the Socialist Party's call for immediate disaffiliation by the unions from Labour with the money to go towards the creation of a new mass workers party. This was debated, albeit briefly at the tail end of a very long day, and was defeated by an overwhelming majority. The CAC approved an amendment on supporting defiance of the anti-union laws.

The Socialist Party had a contingent of between 15 and 20, there was a smattering from Socialist Appeal, the AWL, Socialist Resistance, IBT and Workers Power and three from Workers Action (who seemed to be the princial sales people for "Labour Left Briefing). There were seven of us from PR. (that was for all you left train spotters out there!!)

And finally, in keeping with the top heavy and unfocused nature of the day, there were no practical steps agreed for organising the rank and file in the unions, so in spite of its greater numbers the day achieved much less than the RMT meeting of a fortnight before. The RMT meeting in spite of all its faults at least agreed a delegate conference for the Spring to discuss the practical steps trade unionists can take to start to organise the rank and file and it is the RMT proposal which presents a much better chance of organising a framework through which we can at least start to take the next steps needed.

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/?...ntry&entry=935

 

[nonamenopackdrill]

So the RMT one was better because it agreed to have another conference?

 

[cockneyrebel]

So the RMT one was better because it agreed to have another conference?

Personally I thought they were both pretty dire and both undemocratic, but at least the RMT conference organised something practical as a follow on.

But in all honesty I don't have much hope of anything coming out of the RMT initiative either. We've already got the dead ducks of RESPECT and the CNWP, maybe if this one carries on the way it's heading we'll have on of those wall displays from the 1970s.

 

[Fullyplumped]

And your favourite one is by a well known racist and campaigner in support of Israeli apartheid!

Could you be precise and specify unambiguously who you are describing as being a racist, please?