Birmingham councillor joins Respect
- Thread starter mutley
- Start date
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fullyplumped said:
Examples of what Respect members do in practice (not what you think they do) - Alliya Stennett is a Respect candidate in Birmingham in May, Salma Yaqoob I think you know.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/content/articles/2005/10/26/one_community_vigil_feature.shtml
http://www.respectcoalition.org/index.php?ite=903&rlid=6
Read them carefully - one is an independent report, the other is from Respect itself - and then say whether you think Respect only aims to appeal to one community.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Yes, you're right, I did, and this goes a little bit furthe to confirm my belief.mutley said:
Respect. Every little bit helps.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I'm sure you're right, and that there are lots of people in Respect who are serious about the Project. Respect's position is consciously, genuinely and sincerely trying to appeal to more than the Muslim identity. Its core, though, is the alliance between the MAB and the Trots. I think the Trots will give up (or grow up or convert) and the MAB ideologues will be what remains.Fisher_Gate said:
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fullyplumped said:
Evidence please?
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fullyplumped said:
MAB's position on the General Election:
http://www.mabonline.info/english/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=371
Not exactly the same as Respect is it?
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I don't have evidence - see post 18 on this thread - but I don't think I need any. I'm agreeing with you that Respect doesn't want to morph into the Friends of the Caliphate, but I think that's what will eventually happen. I may be wrong in my prediction, and I'm not trying to convince you that you're wrong.Fisher_Gate said:
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Close enough. The MAB is separate from Respect in the same way the SWP is separate from Respect.Fisher_Gate said:
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
articul8 said:
Far be it from me to defend a Tory-led council ... but ...
NRF money is not council general spending, but is money allocated by the (Labour) government according to specific formulae and priorities. It is not allocated to be spent by local authorities, but by the 'Local Strategic Partnership' - New Labour gobbledygook for unaccountable bodies. The (Labour) government changed the basis of the latest tranche of funding in 2005 to make it 'more focussed' on those areas of greatest need - based on the latest Indices of Deprivation 2004 which are calculated at Super Output Area (SOA), a smaller area than a ward. The new NRF spend is targeted primarily at those SOAs that are in the 10% most deprived in the country.
Oscott ward does not have a high proportion of population living in the 10% most deprived SOAs - it is only 12.4%. Of the 40 Birmingham wards it is ranked 29th in these terms. Seven birmingham wards have proportions of over 80% population in the most deprived SOAs, Washwood Heath has 99% of the population in the most deprived, and the next ones include the aforementioned Lozells & Handsworth East (97%), Sparkbrook (88%) and Aston (88%). It is not up to the council to refuse to prioritise according to the government rules - it is up to the LSP and they must follow the guidance or hand the money back.
Sources:
http://www.neighbourhood.gov.uk/case.asp?id=1532
http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/Genera...CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=11333#deprivation
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
I accept that New Labour inevitably has its hand in these cuts (one more reason not to vote for them, even as a 'least worst' option).
But I don't think it wise for socialists to get caught in their dutch auction of deprivation. Its true that Oscott ward has less deprivation than some other districts of inner city Birmingham. Nevertheless, by those figures, it has 25.4% of its residents living in the poorest quartile of England as a whole and 100% living in the poorest half.
so Cllr Hussein's response:
But I don't think it wise for socialists to get caught in their dutch auction of deprivation. Its true that Oscott ward has less deprivation than some other districts of inner city Birmingham. Nevertheless, by those figures, it has 25.4% of its residents living in the poorest quartile of England as a whole and 100% living in the poorest half.
so Cllr Hussein's response:
hardly makes the political point that funding as a whole needs increasing, not just "targeting".
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
articul8 said:
I agree and that would be the Respect approach. At the time of saying that he was representing LibDem policy.
I think there are many well-meaning councillors of all political persuasion who find themselves in a lot of difficulty with council financing and are put into quite a bind - many give up or sink into a negative machine approach.
More and more council priorities are dictated and controlled by government policy and allocations, and local authorities have had their functions and funding reduced over decades of successive Tory and Labour governments - the removal of schools in the bill earlier this week is only the latest example.
I think central government policy is a problem that all local councillors have difficulty with. I do agree that the primary blame lies with central government, even where it is a local council implementing the policy.
What is obviously needed is a radical rethink that creates genuine local government with the powers to obtain funding (through local and national taxation) and implement radical local policies. I'm old enough to remember that local authorities used to have the power to raise a 2p rate that they could spend on any activity they wished.
The difference between Respect and the LibDems (and Labour left) on this is that Respect would seek to mobilise communities against the government and use activty in the council chamber to agitate and organise.
It's early days yet, and Respect is just finding its feet in the council chambers, but I would envisage major initiatives as Respect starts to win significant numbers of seats.
Fullyplumped said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>no it wont, as they are orgnaised in, and fighting in, different areas altogether. i think there will be very little chance of there being a bnp-respect head to head contest in May 2006 . i doubt there will be a single bnp candidate in say newham and tower hamlets in May
Udo Erasmus
Well-Known Member
Fullyplumped said:
This is just factually incorrect.
The SWP are affiliated to Respect and call for a vote for Respect candidates.
The MAB are not affiliated to Respect and have called for votes for Labour candidates including Ken Livingstone, Respect candidates, Green Party candidates and Plaid Cymru candidates.
Notice the difference Fullyplumped? It's not that difficult to grasp, you have had it explained to you but you continue to lie.
Some members of the MAB who were involved in the anti-war movement working closely with the left have joined Respect on an individual basis because they agree not only with Respect's anti-war stance, but also agree with it's opposition to privatisation, discrimination, racism etc.
JHE
.
That's true. MAB, the Muslim Brotherhood in Britain, decided not to join Respec'. They didn't want to put all their electoral eggs in one basket.Udo Erasmus said:
The MABites decision not to join was a disappointment to the Respekites. The Social Workers, GG and Co. were very keen to persuade MAB to join and GG expressed himself confident that MAB would sign up.
At least one MABite, Anas Takriti, was chosen as a Respec' candidate anyway.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I am not lying, and your sarcasm is unbecoming. I honestly didn't know and I am sure that you're right about the facts.Udo Erasmus said:
However, I think the question of whether an organisation is formally affiliated or just really really closely associated with Respect is just a technicality, in the wider world at least. I believe that Respect is the creature of, and functions mainly as a front for, the SWP and the MAB. Everything else is a detail, especially now that George Galloway has begun exploring interesting new career opportunities in the entertainment industry. I think that it will develop over time in the way I set out earlier.
The MAB is separate from Respect in nearly the same way the SWP is separate from Respect.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I wasn't suggesting that the bnp and Respect would be competing in the same wards in 2006, or even in the same Councils!JimPage said:
My point is that if people observe a generally Muslim party emerging, some of them will respond to the bnp's appeal. The bnp works by stirring fear and a sense of grievance among white people with poor economic opportunities. By becoming more and more of a party appealing primarily to Muslims and building a sense of grievance Respect will - wittingly or otherwise - help to make the bnp's case. I'm sure nobody really intends this to happen but they've got a responsibility to make sure it doesn't, especially in the longer term.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Udo Erasmus said:
Not to mention the LibDems in Rochdale.
"The MABites decision not to join was a disappointment to the Respekites. The Social Workers, GG and Co. were very keen to persuade MAB to join and GG expressed himself confident that MAB would sign up."
It ain't big and it ain't clever - LEARN TO SPELL YOU TOSSER! (not that it will improve your [lack of] political analysis btw)
It ain't big and it ain't clever - LEARN TO SPELL YOU TOSSER! (not that it will improve your [lack of] political analysis btw)
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Matt S said:Umm - is it true that this guy has now left RESPECT again, only a couple of weeks after joining?
If so, thenand I concede that Random was right and I was wrong.
Matt
Allegedly so - on his way to Veritas according to something I read. Easy come ... Easy go...
I don't think it will have any impact on our election campaign which sounds like it has got off to a good start.
cockneyrebel
New Member
Has this bloke seriously left RESPECT already or is this a joke 
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
According to the local press it's more to do with the fact that we don't have any other councillors so there was no group for him to join. He's going to sit as an independent until after the may elections. The implications seem to be that if we win some seats it might be different.
stirring stuff
Sorry if this shakes you further nwnm, but when he stood for the Lib Dems in 2005, he signed the following tax pledge:
I pledge to the taxpayers of my constituency and to the British public that, if elected to the next parliament and except in the event of a national emergency, I will vote against all increases in tax rates unless accompanied by an equal or greater reduction in the overall tax burden within the same proposals.
http://www.taxpledge.org.uk/index.htm
After the May elections no doubt Talib Hussain will do what suits him. What else would you expect from a Lib Dem?
nwnm said:Thanks for clearing that one up. When I first heard it I must admit I was shaken - not stirred
Sorry if this shakes you further nwnm, but when he stood for the Lib Dems in 2005, he signed the following tax pledge:
I pledge to the taxpayers of my constituency and to the British public that, if elected to the next parliament and except in the event of a national emergency, I will vote against all increases in tax rates unless accompanied by an equal or greater reduction in the overall tax burden within the same proposals.
http://www.taxpledge.org.uk/index.htm
After the May elections no doubt Talib Hussain will do what suits him. What else would you expect from a Lib Dem?
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
junius said:
And Tony Blair supported unilateral nuclear disarmament when he first stood for parliament ....
Given that he wasn't elected to parliament ... what exactly is your point?
Maybe people are not allowed to change their mind in your universe, but if I thought that I'd be pretty despairing about the future state of the world.
Similar threads
