What have Respect delivered for their constituents?
- Thread starter mk12
- Start date
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
I'm surprised people have let them off with this.
To me that sounds like a list of failures to use the position of Councillor effectively. Most of these claimed "successes" don't need a Councillor to achieve them. Either the Councillors have been really ineffective, or they haven't grasped what Councillors are for.
Now that is a debate in itself. Maybe Respect feels that opposition Councillors are just activists paid a small amount to agitate inside the council building, rather than representatives of local residents with the job of reviewing and scrutinising policy and contributing knowledge and experience.
jolly good - did they win the vote? Was the proposed increase unfair?Udo Erasmus said:
Does it take an elected councillor to do that? Sounds like community work to me.Udo Erasmus said:
Why do Councillors need to take "direct action?" Did the residents achieve the objective of stopping the council giving backdated planning permission?Udo Erasmus said:
Why would Councillors need to take legal action against themselves? Weren't the Councillors able to achieve their objectives indside the Council?Udo Erasmus said:
Challenged, eh? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Did it work?Udo Erasmus said:
Did it work? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Duly highlighted, then. Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Did it work? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Did it work? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
Did it work? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that? Why only highlight the plight of Palestinians? Were any other plights highlighted?Udo Erasmus said:
Well done. Did it work? Do you need to be a Councillor to do that?Udo Erasmus said:
To me that sounds like a list of failures to use the position of Councillor effectively. Most of these claimed "successes" don't need a Councillor to achieve them. Either the Councillors have been really ineffective, or they haven't grasped what Councillors are for.
Now that is a debate in itself. Maybe Respect feels that opposition Councillors are just activists paid a small amount to agitate inside the council building, rather than representatives of local residents with the job of reviewing and scrutinising policy and contributing knowledge and experience.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Presumably the environmental audit thing was achieved not only because Respect councillors moved it, but also because a majority of Councillors agreed it.Das Uberdog said:Increase in the recycling rates was one factor in the award - the motion that Respect submitted to the council now necessitates that all future council decisions must be inspected by an environmental audit before being implemented. That means everything - building plans, roadworks, oh yeah - and waste collection. Greens haven't got owt like it.
Not to mention the fact that whether or not it was Respect's doing that such improvements were made on the council, 8 Green councillors in Lancaster should have achieved a fuckuvalot more.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Yah. Boo. And sucks.Udo Erasmus said:
cockneyrebel
New Member
Again Udo why do you just make things up? Workers Power still call for abstention/build a new workers party now, they haven't changed their line at all. The members of permanent revolution always disagreed with this line and that was part of the faction dispute and why the split happened. So now we're a different organisation and not a faction obviously we are taking a different line (one that internally was always the case). Not that this is of any interest.
As for the SWP calling for votes for Greens, they have done and also SWP members have said people should vote Green on these very boards.
Louis MacNeice
Autumn Journalist
MK and CR stop it! You both know very well that it isn't the SWP that calls for any vote to stop the BNP; that's UAF.
Louis MacNeice
Louis MacNeice
Red Leicester
Active Member
So CR, what do you think about PR's call for a vote for Labour? Any particular wards that PR will campaigning in?
cockneyrebel
New Member
I should think you know my view given we knew each other for quite a while in Workers Power! As it happens, on a personal level, I don't have a set view on this and think it's a bit of a grey area. I still totally think that the Campaign for a New Workers Party is a waste of time and politically bankrupt as an idea (do Workers Power still support the CNWP?).
As it goes Workers Power gave critical support to Labour many times when I was a member and I never remember us doing any active campaigning for the Labour Party so a funny question to ask.
But PR members have been actively supporting the John McDonnell campaign. I can't quite work out what Workers Power think about John McDonnell you've remained fairly silent on the issue. Although one of your members on another board was saying that can't wait for him to lose because his campaign is is a distraction from the real issues. A bit ultra left if you ask me.
I went to JDs campaign rally in London and was fairly impressed as it goes.
cockneyrebel
New Member
Still given the below I'm surprised the new workers party and CNWP haven't done better.
dennisr
the acceptable face
cockneyrebel said:
So you think there is not burning need for an independent voice for working class people in this country - an organisation where different working class viewpoints can be discussed - and that socialists should not bother raising this idea, CR?
cockneyrebel said:
But the McDonnell approach of trying to transform the Labour Party from within is not so 'politically bankrupt'?
Interesting... (and sad too see from PR members...)
scifisam
deleted
laptop said:
Yup.
The most prominent Respect candidate has achieved ... his own celebrity.
(And doesn't bother voting against Crossrail and the like. Hell, he wasn't even in the country for the majority of the election build-up!)
I'd say that GG has made white voters here more likely to vote BNP, which is a bit of a fucker for someone who is white, dislikes Galloway's politics and dislikes the BNP even more.
Who the Hell do we have to vote for now?
Red Leicester
Active Member
cockneyrebel
New Member
Of course I do. But does that mean I should support the CNWP or the tactic of a new workers party? We've had this debate many times so can't see the point of going over it again. I don't think the CNWP or the new workers party slogan (in the case of WP) is bringing us any closer to that, in fact I think it has more dangers than any potential positives. The new workers party tactic shouldn't be one that is raised by revolutionaries totally independent of a move from the working class, which is the case at the moment. There is a big difference between revolutionaries getting involved in something like the Left Party in Germany and setting up a de facto reformist organisation to try and attract reformists. But as said we've done all this so many times, it's just gonna be the same things said over and over.
Dennis you asked someone to debate honestly on another thread. You must know that no-one in PR thinks that the LP could be transformed. That's not why we support the McDonnell campaign and we're clear about that in what we've published on the issue. It's about creating a fighting campaign and using that campaign as a way to build rank and file movements in the unions and put pressure on the bureaucracies.
To be honest as the SP says that the LP is a bourgeois party I find it slightly strange that you would support JM. It would be like supporting a candidate in the Liberals or Conservative leadership elections.
As for voting Labour despite Red Leicester's comments lots of revolutionary parties have used the critical support tactic with bourgeois workers parties when they were just as a bad as New Labour. Pointing out how bad New Labour is isn't really the issue. The LP has always been an imperialist and anti-working class organisation in terms of the governments and leadership.
dennisr
the acceptable face
cockneyrebel said:
So we have to wait until the class makes a move? - CR, what role then for revolutionaries??
We have to interviene in what exists CR, not in what we would like to exist - all attempts to raise an issue have dangers - but less dangers than not raising the issue at all, surely???
Its why the CWI has been able to play the role it has within the Left Party - it has been the left wing of that formation.
What are these dangers, explain, mate?
cockneyrebel said:
You don't have to play the hurt soul with me, mate
I think i had the right to raise this given that you were refering to both (in the same post) and saying that the call for a new workers party was 'politically bankcrupt' - I was comparing this to the support PR are willing to give to the McDonnell campaign. I think it was a fair enough point to make given it was a genuine question in response to your initial comment on 'bankruptcy'.
I really hope PRs split with WP and the resulting desire to distance your organisation from WP is not an underlying and unstated reason for the turnaround on the CNWP initiative (ie letting your differences override the necessary tasks facing the wider working class). That would be classic sectarianism
dennisr
the acceptable face
cockneyrebel said:
CR, in some countries and in some circumstances the CWI group is actually working inside bourgeois parties - for instance as the trade union section inside a bourg party in Nigeria. The only critria is the interests of working people - are we putting those interests to the fore, does this provide an opportunity to put those ideas to wider groups of workers. The situation in the Labour Party is a new one in the sense that it was the main workers party in the UK at one point (and of course i would agree it always had the bourgous head). There are still pockets of 'old labour' I would not dispute that - but is that where thinking sections of working class are, at this moment in time? i don't think so, i think they are largely outside
Marxist ideas are not like a car manual any more than they are like a religious tract - there is not a given and unchanging set of instructions for every model. Those ideas are a useful guide to practice, thats all (the reason I avoid quoting this or that tract from this or that bearded socialist to back up a point).
Red Leicester
Active Member
cockneyrebel said:
What impressed you?
cockneyrebel
New Member
Come on dennis. For years the SP weren't calling for a NWP. It's just a tactic. Firstly there is the obvious role of building a revolutionary organisation but also there are united fronts and the massively important task of building a rank and file in the unions.
Again we've debated this so many times, so you know what I think. I think the dangers do outweigh any positives in the circumstances. Neither of us can prove that either way. But with such low levels of class struggle if by some miracle the CNWP got anywhere it would almost inevitably become a small version of Old Labour. Indeed I couldn't seen any other possibility to be honest, but the SP probably sees things differently because of your economic outlook (which is even more pointed with WP and the pre-revolutionary period, indeed in their latest documents they say that things are becoming even more intense).
I can see why you might think this but seriously this really isn't the case. The faction that became PR always totally oppossed the CNWP initiative.
Agreed but I just think in the circumstances and given what the SP say about Labour I'm just a bit surprised you back JM. But fair enough.
Well John McDonnell for a start, it was a very impassioned and moving speech, whatever his political flaws and he also stressed the need for a fighting campaign and that it wasn't just about the vote.
Some of the trade unionist speakers were also very inspiring and was surprised that there was a layer (if a small layer) of young activists there.
cockneyrebel
New Member
As an aside this kinda thing shows how vital the task is in terms of the unions:
It kind of reminds me of stuff I read in terms of what tasks the CP put forward in the early 1920s with a return to the unions drive, but obviously the revolutionary left in the UK is weaker now (indeed I'd say it's at its weakest point in 100 years).
It kind of reminds me of stuff I read in terms of what tasks the CP put forward in the early 1920s with a return to the unions drive, but obviously the revolutionary left in the UK is weaker now (indeed I'd say it's at its weakest point in 100 years).
cockneyrebel
New Member
On strikes in 2005 there were the lowest number of days lost in history, 157,000. In 2006 this rose to 755,000 thousand, still very low historically, but obviously an improvement. However if you take out the UNISON one day strike this figure drops to about 300,000. For February 2007 (the latest month in terms of figures), only 4000 days were lost.
Now there signs of improvement in some places and there have been massive social movements. But in this kind of situation, in my view, the new workers party tactic is total no go.
Now there signs of improvement in some places and there have been massive social movements. But in this kind of situation, in my view, the new workers party tactic is total no go.
dennisr
the acceptable face
cockneyrebel said:
The SP would argue that the objective need for an independent working class voice is an urgent one. Hence the need to puch both the slogan and the initiative. It also sees the moves within the trade union movement - no matter how small these may be - such as the RMT conference coming up as part of the articulation of this need. I don't see the need to re-build the unions as seperate from the need for an independent voice - the two things are inter-dependent
cockneyrebel said:
Of course - our reasoning is somewhat different from WP (and i kind of guessed that the now PR faction was opposed from the beginning). WP see themselves as bring the 'revolutionary' factor into the CNWP campaign (something the SP members find a little amusing..) But I still don't see the dangers you mentioned being outlined?
You can see the movements in other places - Scotland, Germany, Brazil and elsewhere - but do not see this a possible in the UK so therefore only raise the re-building of the left within New Labour as the only possibility - the one that aint 'bankrupt' as an idea?? You can see the raised eyebrow behind my point here cant you?
cockneyrebel said:
The question that the McDonnell campaign has to answer is 'were to now?' after the election campaign is lost - again that raises the question of an independent party...
dennisr
the acceptable face
cockneyrebel said:
yep, I know, its all doom and gloom isn't it
so, the only option is to re-build the left in labour?? (while condemning any other new reformist organisation even as a possibility - and as simply 'a new labour party' - that seems to be a comment tied up in its own contradictions)
yes, there have been massive social movements - have they been reflected inside the labour party? how do we build on these movements? - you see CR - it comes back to that 'bankcrupt' idea you dismissed out of hand earlier
cockneyrebel
New Member
They could be inter-dependent I agree with that, as said though I think the new workers party tactic will fail anyway, and even on the outside chance it did succeed would not bring want revolutionaries would want anyway. The only way revolutionaries could win over reformists in such a formation would be through class struggle, and that isn't gonna happen here and now. The only possible result could be re-inforcing illusions in reformism.
The difference being in that in those places the formations came out of real workers movements and struggles, not miniscule trotskyist groups taking an initiatives. Also I've already said that there is no chance of reforming Labour but JMs campaign could, through an active campaign, have role to play in re-building the unions.
And as already said there is of course the role of actually building a revolutionary organisation itself and a myriad of united fronts (RMT initiative, STWC, Save the NHS campaigns, Defend Council Housing etc etc).
Come on mate, you know that's not what I'm saying. But class struggle is still at a low ebb in the UK. But of course there are many encouraging campaigns, including the united fronts I mentioned above.
Don't get me wrong, if a new workers party came out of real forces I'd be all for getting involved. I just don't think a tiny trotskyist group will make one bit of difference to that either way. And as said the only way such a formation could be a gain to revolutionaries is through class struggle, which just isn't happening on any significant level in the UK at the moment.
cockneyrebel
New Member
PS Sorry if I appeared dismissive, maybe I should of used another word other than bankrupt. In all seriousness if the CNWP tactic worked, I'd be as happy as anyone, I just don't see it and I think the dangers outweigh any positives.
disownedspirit
New Member
a question for dennis and CR
what would you regard as succesful for a new workers party?
electorally or intervening in ,as you say cr, the low level of class stuggle
or when the class struggle takes off again...
are you like a stopped watch we were right NOW is the time for a new workers party
what would you regard as succesful for a new workers party?
electorally or intervening in ,as you say cr, the low level of class stuggle
or when the class struggle takes off again...
are you like a stopped watch we were right NOW is the time for a new workers party
cockneyrebel
New Member
I'm a tad hungover so might not make much sense here......
In terms of what would make a NWP successful? Well I suppose something that means a significant revolutionary party can be created out of it. The only way this would realistically happen is through a split with revolutionaries hopefully taking most people with them. The SWP would have this idea with RESPECT but would never say it in public. The problem is that that can only come about through class struggle, not though people telling other people that revolutionary socialism is a good idea. In the circumstances (very low class struggle) all that can happen is that an old labour type organisation will be formed (well more likely nothing will get off the ground at all). Now if such a new organisation was thrown up by the workers movement (such as in Germany) then obviously revolutionaries should intervene in it, and in all probability if that happens it will mean there is more significant class struggle going on that there is in the UK at the moment.
Another example of this happening was in the USA in the 1930s and that's where Trotsky originally advocated the tactic (while recognising that even in those circumstances there were a lot of dangers in terms of re-enforcing reformism), but the USA in the 1930s was a far cry from the UK now in terms of class struggle (see the figures above).
With Workers Power it makes more sense as they think we're in a pre-revolutinary period. See:
Of course this has little attachment to reality. But if that's what you think I guess the NWP tactic would make a bit more sense.
urbanrevolt
New Member
We (Permanent revolution) support McDonnell as a way of opening up a debate in the unions and anywhere else about how we can organise as workers to fight for socialism.
If the cnwp were organising mass meetings around the issues of course we would intervene in them. I put a motion to my local trades council some months ago for a public meeting to invite CNWP, Respect, Labour party etc to debate the whole issue of working class representation and also a leaflet to use against the facists in the local election. The first passed but so far nothing has been done about it: the leaflet was put at a meeting which wasn't quorate and then missed the deadline.
The point is to begin to repair the networks of working class militants in the unions, to begin to stand candidates in the elections and take steps towards building a revolutionary party. Will this come about through the LP splitting or primarily from the outside? Hard to gainsay or predict- but we should keep an eye on and attempt to intervene in both.
If the cnwp were organising mass meetings around the issues of course we would intervene in them. I put a motion to my local trades council some months ago for a public meeting to invite CNWP, Respect, Labour party etc to debate the whole issue of working class representation and also a leaflet to use against the facists in the local election. The first passed but so far nothing has been done about it: the leaflet was put at a meeting which wasn't quorate and then missed the deadline.
The point is to begin to repair the networks of working class militants in the unions, to begin to stand candidates in the elections and take steps towards building a revolutionary party. Will this come about through the LP splitting or primarily from the outside? Hard to gainsay or predict- but we should keep an eye on and attempt to intervene in both.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
