LINK: Special Edition - Open letter Bulletin:PROPOSALS for a
MANCHESTER Confer
|
stefan
|
Nov 09, 2005 03:39 PST
|
- The LINK-
OPEN FORUM OF LABOUR PARTY MEMBERS
AND TRADE UNIONISTS TO RECLAIM THE PARTY
SPECIAL EDITION
We are publishing a special edition of the LINK reproducing the OPEN LETTER
from Stefan Cholewka, EC/GC Rochdale CLP, that was circulated at Labour
party conference and nationally to all CLP's and affiliated trade unions.
You will find the list of endorsers so far as well as the messages received
in support.
In light of the recent developments - the education white paper transferring
education to private companies, the proposal to introduce a two-tier pension
scheme in the public sector, just to pick up two examples. Both go against
what the Labour party has always been fighting for. Wouldn't it be
necessary for the endorsers of the appeal, and all those fighting to
defend the Labour party against the lethal course taken by the Blair
government, to meet at a conference before Christmas 2005 to discuss the
main issues we are confronting and the ways and means to resist, in order to
defend the Labour party and the unions.
Couldn't we meet in Manchester unless someone can propose an alternative
venue.
As a first contribution to the discussion we have reproduced a letter from
a correspondent that asks for a political assessment of what took place at
Labour party conference. We invite you to participate in this discussion by
sending a contribution on this issue or any other question dealing with what
should be the working topic of this conference: the defence of the Labour
party.
The analysis developed in the contributions printed in this Bulletin only
express their author's personal view.
We would welcome any other contribution which would not necessarily share
the same views. There is certainly much to be said about, for instance, the
Government's white paper on education.
We invite readers and all endorsers to send in their own comments and
analysis to help set the framework for the conference discussion.
A further contribution takes the form of a national appeal in defence of
public sector pensions.
Comments in Support of S. Cholewka
Member of Rochdale CLP
I have no objection to supporting any Party member under threat of expulsion
for exercising their democratic and party rights to engage in discussion and
debate and support a particular point of view. From what you have written,
your right to remain in the party should be supported.
Come on. Are we supporting Stefan here?
A Labour Tory coalition makes a nonsense of any Labour Party politics.
Anyone who enters in to one must be committing some crime worse than
suggesting voting for a waste of space Liberal..
There can never be a case for a Labour Tory coalition.
And as for putting the membership fee up massively and expelling anyone with
any kind of independent thinking. Donıt we object....There isnıt so much a
fight over policies going on in the party. The division is between creepy,
crawly, donıt rock the boat loyalists and normal, healthy, I sometimes
disagree members.
Dear Stefan
You have my support.
Dear Stefan
Obviously I do not know everything about what is happening in Rochdale, but
the picture you paint is disturbing. You also mention many issues of concern
to many people, and the fundamental point that, in Government, the Party is
not acting as the Labour Party is expected to act.
No doubt you will be attempting to have the Rochdale case settled at
Conference. I will copy your message to others in the Party to help ensure
all this is done in the open.
Stefan and other Comrades should be supported.
Of necessity socialists in the Labour Party are in coalition within the LP
with an assortment of in house Tories, neo-liberals and other hangers
on.'Partnership' with the official Conservatives is a step too far. It says
much for the state of the LP that a cogent argument in favour 'Partnership'
with the Tories can be made at all.
Dear Stefan, I fully support what you are saying. I am a member of
Northampton north CLP, we kept our MP Sally Keeble but lost our best Tony
Clarke, Northampton south, we also lost power on the town council but we
could have gone into coalition with the Lib-Dems. We did not. I am a member
of the Northampton shire AMAL branch of the CWU. I will be at the CLP
tonight supporting a motion against any FURTHER privatisation of the Royal
Mail/ Post Office.
Good luck, In Comradeship.
Disgusting to read the account below but not so surprising....
I fully support you in your fight, I would never join the Tories or Lib-Dems
in any council or party work. That goes against all what I have fought for
since I joined in 1956.
Dear Stefan
Thank you for your message, I am not atte4nding conference I will read your
paper and I wish you well, yours fraternally
You have my support, sounds outrageous.
Iıll bring this to the attention of the branch members and CLP / LGC etc.
I am sorry you lost your Labour MP as a marginal seat we fortunately
retained our very good and hard-working constituency MP (elected in 1997)
with a lesser majority than last time but with a smaller loss than any other
seat in the Eastern Region. For a third term some loss of votes was to be
expected and itıll be worse for the fourth so please do not try to stop
Our Party achieving and being united in that wish. I am really sorry you
are having hard times in Rochdale but work to reverse it and stop it
spreading please. Iıll be happy to meet up with you at Conference to chat if
you wish. Please do feel free to forward this to your distribution list.
Kind regards
The number of times I've been subject to "uncomradely behaviour" by elected
members at CLP meetings!! Think I'll start complaining to Regional Office.
Thanks
I'll take it up with our CLP.
Mr Cholewka
Thank you for your email.
There is much in your communication with which many Labour Party Members
would agree, though I will not say that I agree with every point you raised.
However, I believe that our opportunity to make a fundamental change in the
direction of the Labour Party will come at the time of a leadership
election. Too often I see people leaving the party over one policy or
another and it saddens me that they are only empowering further the people
who agree with those policies and remain in the party, marginalising those
of us who are still fighting our corner.
I very much understand your frustration. I was furious over a brief
coalition with the Lib Dems on Redbridge Council last year and other issues
have upset me from time to time. I also agree that it is unthinkable to form
a coalition with the conservatives at any level of government....
Hi Stefan
Go for it, if I was a bit closer to Rochdale I would give you a hand, down
in the south
we call Blair the second Tory party looks as though we are not far wrong.
Good luck, they don't like it when members are right, they make decisions
and they must be right because they made them, it's called new Labour, Ha!.
Bring back Old Labour at least we had values then. Kind Regard
Dear Stefan,
I am not, nor ever will be a member of Labour or any other party. However
the attempt to expel you is typical of the vile, brainwashing plague that
has been affecting this country since...Thatcher was in power. Gagging is
prevalent in every aspect of our lives, be it the workplace, home, the media
or in politics. We are becoming a stagnant turgid society where only those
who parrot out the mindless crap from the press and TV are considered worthy
of attention or praise. Any attempt to question the orthodoxy of one side or
the other is greeted with at best derision or at worst: smears, lies, and
sometimes violence. Good for you for trying to resist the smug rhetoric of
the right. I wholeheartedly support you in your campaign.
Something has sadly died in the Labour Party, as Voltaire said I may not
agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say
it. Free speech is the casualty and unless a new party is formed then it
will continue.
Stefan,
You can count on my support , as I fully agree with your position. The views
of some of our so called labour party members is unbelievable and is in many
case more right wing than the Tories. Unfortunately the Co-op Movement is
full of "Cllr. Bretts" in different parts of the country which is why its
going nowhere.
Dear Stefan
My fullest support to you. Any pact is bad for the party we should always
stand on our own and let the electorate decide at the end of the day. You
have the support of the SCOTMID CO-OPERATIVE PARTY COUNCIL.
Hi
It might take some time to sort it all out over there but at least you are
having a go, you better watch it though, the government has got lots of new
hostels to lock people up in it donıt like.
I feel ashamed to hear of Rochdale councils pact with the Tories. Kirklees
refused all such attempts even though this put the Liberals in control. This
is a matter the Regional office should condemn rather than suspending the
CLP and attacking Stefan Cholewka.
Dear Stefan
I wholeheartily support you but I have left the new Labour Party. I have
listened to all the arguments about working inside of the party but I feel
the party has reached the point of 'no return'. What we need is a new party
that can promote Socialism and look after the working man. After all the
country cannot function without him.. Tony Blair came to power and threw
democracy out of the window. If you are expelled there is no hope for this
party. You have only put into words what thousands, no millions of people
believe.
Best Wishes,
Dear Stefan,
I agree with everything you say. A while ago I heard a quotation from
Margaret Thatcher. When she was asked what her greatest achievement was, she
replied New Labourı because she then knew that their project was over.ı
Need I say more? Good luck and donıt let them throw you out of the party.
Regards,
Just as a matter of interest - the Bath & Wansdyke Local Govt Party has been
suspended since just before the last local government elections. I don't
want to comment on the reasons for this or your local problems but I have
been a bit uneasy about the power that our regional office seems to
have to impose an indefinite suspension. There doesn't seem to be any duty
to explain or justify the length of the suspension (I don't question the
need for the power to suspend); it seems it could go on forever. Good luck
Stefan,
I cannot help but support you in this. Even though I'm New Labour, the most
left-wing edge of New Labour but still New Labour, I cannot help but agree
with what you've said. Regardless of opinions, as long as members believe in
the fundamentals of our party, then they must have the right to say that and
to be protected from those who disagree. I am also shocked to hear that
there is a coalition between Labour and the Tories. It's absolutely
disgusting. No wonder we've fallen to the lowest membership levels in
decades. You've got my support, even if I disagree with some of what you
say. (You're spot on in opposing the privatisation's though). Good luck and
God bless,
To: North West Regional Organiser, The Labour Party 20th
September 2005
Dear Comrade,
I am a "life member" of the Labour party, with 58 years membership since I
joined in 1947, for which I received a Long Service Award last spring. In
retirement I have held Party office as CLP secretary till 2000 AD then
Todmorden BLP secretary till 2003 and chairman 2003-4.
I am concerned to have been contacted by Stefan Cholewka of Rochdale CLP
with a report that Rochdale Councils Labour Group is at variance with the
party's Local Government Committee, and that "the CLP has been suspended". I
have always understood that the LGC (Formally DLP) establishes party policy
and that the Council Group is entrusted with its implementation.
Here in Calder Valley Constituency we held our highly-marginal seat in the
General Election last May by a majority reduced from over 3000 in 2001 to
1367 - a very creditable achievement but one which leaves us vulnerable, so
that any scandal or crisis in the neighbouring Rochdale seat can risk
disaster here!
With Tony Blair on the point of relinquishing national "leadership" it would
seem unwise to let this obviously controversial performance cause further
local harm. (I stood here for Rochdale MBC in May 2003 and suffered from
vote-withholding by over a hundred of our core-voters, and only held my Town
Council seat by a miserable 18 vote majority). It seems clear that we must
hold the party together pending leadership-election, and I appeal for peace
in Rochdale CLP and an early restoration of members right to contribute
their views at meetings.
Yours Sincerely,
Councillor Frank R McManus OBE
(Labour Langfield Ward)
Todmorden Town Council
Mayor 1994-5
OPEN LETTER FIRST ENDORSERS (personal capacity)
Christine Taylor, TGWU, treasurer, Rochdale CLP, Mick Cummings, TGWU,
Rochdale CLP, Mick Coats NATFHE, EC Rochdale CLP, Robin Rankin, T&GWU. GC
Rochdale CLP, Sonya Conwell, chair, Rochdale Co-operative Party, Sam
O'Brien, Rochdale UNISON, Tommy McClure, Middleton West CLP, Bill
Holdsworth, UNISON,West Norwood CLP, Nigel Maroney, Skipton & Sutton Labour
Party, Siggi Kaup,Skipton & Sutton Labour Party, Nick Phillips, UNISON,
Southwark, Helen Peters, London Metropolitan University, NATFHE vice chair.
Janet Shapiro, London Metropolitan University NATFHE, retired, Wood Green
CLP, John Calderon, Hackney South CLP, Francis Kelly, LSE, Brian Barton,
GMB, Milton Keynes South West CLP, Tony Heyes, Bracknell CLP (past
treasurer),David Hides, Moore Valley CLP. Cllr.Frank McManus, chair,
Todmorden Walsden & Stoodley BLP, Dr. N.M. Queen, School of Mathematics &
Statistics, University of Birmingham, Chris Duckham,Withington
(Manchester) CLP, Mike Bird, Conwy CLP, Paul McLean, Leeds North East CLP,
Leeds Co-operative Party,Joe O'Neill, Northampton North CLP, Martha Mundy,
Bethnal Green & Bow CLP, Cllr. Alexander Hilton Newbury Ward,London Borough
of Redbridge, Cllr. Sheila Peacock, Haringey CLP, Fred Groves, Bassetlaw
CLP, Francis Cook, secretary, Brikenhead & Tranmere BLP, Birkenhead CLP,
Wirral LGC,, Dave Green. Fire Brigades Union: Executive Council Nottingham,
Gedling, Labour party, Peter Moore, Runnymede and Weybridge CLP Youth
Officer, Chris Purnell,secretary,Orpington CLP, Tony Richings, St Ives and
Cornwall Co-operative Party, George Neill, UNISON, Rajmil Fischman,
University of Keele, AUT,John Morton, Glenrothes County CLP and GC (also
Central Fife for Holyrood elections) Member of Fife Co-operative Party (also
chair of Markinch Community Council), Mike Calvert, Chair, St Annıs Ward
LP,Tottenham CLP,Assistant Secretary, Islington UNISON, Bahadur Najak
,University of Durham, Executive member, Association of University
Teachers,School of Economics, Finance and Business, Ray
Henderson.Co-operative party ,Stewart Kerr, Secretary.on behalf of Scot-Mid
Co-operative Party Council. Hazel Becker, Antony Martin, Dr.Jeffrey Boss,
AUT, Stroud CLP, Jamie Thomas, (ex-NUJ), North Durham Co-operative party,
North Durham CLP,Tony Thorpe,Chair of Surrey & Berkshire Co-op
Party,Patricia Adams, St Ives CLP and St Ives Cornwall Co-operative Party,
Winifred Wheable-Archer, Denby Dale Labour Party, Wakefield CLP,Malcolm Law,
AUT, University of York, Tim Kitchin ,Partner,Glasshouse Partnership, John
Francis Sims, Yate & Chipping Sodbury, Br. LP Bristol, Chair, South
Gloucester TGWU,Bernard Morgan, Bath & Wansdyke LGC, Martin Rudland, Tony
Benn, (ex-Labour MP), Tony Richardson, BFAWU, Wakefield CLP, Graham
Brook,Wilmslow CLP. NO TO LABOUR-TORY PACT: E Boyle, Sonya Conwell,Wendy J
Crowls, Victor Swinson, Sam O'Brien, Tariq Khan, M Jamell,Mike Coats, Mike
Cummings, Stefan Cholewka, Ronald Ayton, Tom Wales, J Galdrick, J O'Gorman,
M. Taylor,Ivan Towers,Michelle Wilson, Debbie Marsh, P Duckworth, M Pilling,
J Andria, V Barlow, M Ginley, M Thompson, S Narnock-Treece, L Scott, A Lord,
W Fleming, J Brierley, Luis de Cruz, John Milne, M Mitchell , John Proffitt,
H Kershaw, K Sutcliff, G Holden, B Hindley R Waine, K Stafford, Y Holmes, R
Beg, M Brierley,M Holmes, V Hague, K Sloan, S Simmons,B Suthers, B Crossley,
E. Birkett, E Owens, K Fox, B Kershaw, Chrisitne Talyor, Patrick O'Gorman,
Gwen Calland, Sharon Cheetham, M E Ginley, M Latham, L Watson, L McKeown, P
Dawber, D Proffitt, G Furlong, P Eastwood, G Eastwood, C Donnelly, P
Grimshaw, L Alves, D Greenwood,A Grant, A Suillivan, W Johnstone, G Roberts,
A Lewis, N P Fukwa, N Howard, P Phythian, J Garside, R Garside,D Bull, J
Bull, A Alford, R Warburton, Donna Beaumont,Gavin Morgan, Peter Lane, Diana
Kenrica, L Clarke, Derek Turner, Steven Bradley, Vanessa Bergin. Martyine
Holmes, J Openshaw, B Lynch, Chris Stead, Linda Oliver, Alan Oliver, Lisa
Toft, J Meadowes, M Kielne, Chris Howard,Val Turpin, R Turnip, G Williams, M
Ahamed, J Whitelesse, J Lyon, N Ahad, Paul McGeary, K Scott, L Kelly, G
Ashworth, M P Lee, Shabnam Mawdsley, Ms Doyle, L Callaghan,E Callaghan,Noel
Liddly,H. McNally, Andrew Whally, Buffy Willow Hadley, Garry Johnson, Simon
Wood, Karen Hatch, M Dale, D Kelly, Michael Howard, D Williams, T Williams,
C Birch, A Birch,M Lane, J Lane, B Lane, J Kirk,D Kennedy, S Simpson,John
Clegg,Lynette Pounder, Gemma Hughes, Susan Kyzanish,Aza Singh, Mr. Graham, T
Alford, P Degnan, M Degnan, C.J. Aitchinson, A Degnan, P Edwards, C S
Rugadza, T Power S Lord, Sheila Nokes, Brenda Halle, Claudia Dodd, A
Shepard, G Shepard, N Vannory, A Degan, Roy Winterburn, J Hollainson. J
Barker, A Williams, C Wainwright, P M Leach, T Creede, Wendy Jawasla, W
Jawasla, B Shaw, D Curran, Ann Atkins,C Golden, M Brorley,G Miller,D
MacCleod, S Harrington, K Clegg,M Kennedy, D Clegg, D Iveson, B
Thornborough, Amanda Haistead, Carol Wind, Anthony Morrison Robin Ainsby,C
Ball,Chantelle Romang, Donna Greenwood, Tony Powell, Natalie Powell, Dermot
Trainer, Linda Bradbury G Oday, R Waite, F Ramsbottom, L Nigel, J Mercer, S
Glynes, S Bamford, S Sandle, Caroline O'Gorman, C Picairs, D Higgins, E
Short, J. C Thomspon, D Stewart, C Poole, J Walker, E McFly, David Mills, C
Nugent S Poole, R Liddle, George W G Iverson, Kate Mallinson, J Dawson,C
Colgate, C Rigg, T Weston, A McCavana, P McCavana, A Warren, J Ritter,R
Hall, S Codling, G Furlong, C Perry, P Dobson, A M Painter, S G Painter, B
Doyle, J Kent, A Kent A Shanag,P Shanag, K West, D A Schaft, S Rhodes, A
Gardner, A Butler ,S Gempke Mr. Stott, J Clements, D Pinnigton,John Krasmer,
C Rodyer, G Whitworth, S Taylor, Alan Brierley, Martin Wilkinson, David
Oliver, Michelle Oliver ,P L Travis,M Shafonir, Dave Themry,S Baule, S
Feming,G J Buckley; Jacky Edwards, John McLoughlin, Tony Homer, D Horner, W
O'Neill, E Goodwin, Tommy McClure, Cllr, Terry Smith, W.K Jones, Peter
Finton, C Beard, E M McKay, C Roberts, Fred Whittaker, J Harris, D Park, G
Neary, C Grawford, E W Hayes,J Gill, A Worrall, D Hoyle, S D Baggley, R S
Cullion, K Horner, M Edwards, G Hunt, Roy Gill, B Partington, J B Horner,P L
BestG Banford, J Maples, J Farrell, A Kenyon, R Wilkins, L Wilkins, O
Chadwick, L Butler, John P Booth, Denis McMahon, Peter Roger, Brain Quinn, B
Webster, A Stones, C Walker, T Jones, Jimmy Lowes, Eddie Dougall, Dr. N.M.
Queen,
- DISCUSSION -
LETTER FROM A CORRESPONDENT
Dear Stefan,
The brutal treatment of the 82 year-old Walter Wolfgang, at Labour party
conference in Brighton, a survivor of Nazi Germany and Erith and Thamesmead
CLP chair Steve Forrest was a disgrace and an outrage. The sight of an 82
year-old being roughed-up and thrown out for dissent is an act of gross
intimidation and an example of New Labour control freakery. The suppression
of dissent is endemic.
From what I have read emergency resolutions at conference were excluded for
spurious reasons and delegates had received text messages from party
officials telling them how to vote.
The New Labour regime seems to be characterised by intimidation, suppression
of dissent and gerrymandering of votes at conference and in CLP's up and
down the country. It is a disgrace and an insult to the democratic
traditions and values of the Labour party.
It is impossible that Tony Blair did not know he was going to stamp out all
public dissent and discussion within the party. It is impossible he did not
sanction and approve the decision that there would be no debate on Iraq at
Labour party conference. It is an grave insult not only too Labour party
members and trade unionists but to the nation and armed service personnel
plunged into an illegal and unjust war.
One look at Walter Wolfgang and you could see traditional Labour values
incarnate. The Labour party - as opposed to New Labour - believes in
democratic debate by fact and reason. New Labour is incompatible with party
democracy and indeed with democracy itself.
Walter Wolfgang was detained under the terrorist laws. The "global war on
terror" and calls for "nation unity" act as the pretext to attack the
fundamentals of political democracy through the drafting of a set of
comprehensive anti-terrorist legislation granting sweeping powers to the
state to eliminate all or weaken many of the checks and balances that remain
on government surveillance, wiretapping, detention and criminal prosecution.
These measures will violate political democracy, trade union rights, human
rights and civil liberties.
Blair is introducing these measures in the country which was the birthplace
of Habeas Corpus.These measures oppose and run counter to a tradition going
back to the Magna Carta.
I would be very interested in your assessment of the events that took place
at Labour party conference following the events in Rochdale and your
on-going campaign against The Labour-Tory coalition in the town. This seems
a step too far even for party members who consider themselves supporters of
Blair and New Labour.
Their seems to be a growing mood of resistance among many if not all party
members, trade unionists, together with the local and national endorsers of
your open letter and the appeal against the Labour-Tory pact in Rochdale to
come together to discuss in a constructive way what should be done,
following the Labour party conference on a whole raft of policies. A
political offensive seems to have opened up by Blair-Brown on pensions,
health and education. I think that you should make a seriously effort -
despite the scantiness of resources at your immediate disposal - to
organise a national conference in the North West - Manchester, this is the
region were you live and have personal contact with activists on the ground.
Yours in solidarity
Bill Holdsworth
UNISON,West Norwood CLP
Assessment:
Labour party conference,Brighton 2005
The main theme was Blair's mad attempt to impose "control freakery" on the
party, destroy its tradition of free speech and internal democracy and
therefore destroy the party itself. This accounts for an incident which was
quite unprecedented. As Jack Straw was explaining why British troops should
stay in Iraq, an 82-year-old activist, who had been a party member for fifty
years, had also been an active member of the SPD, a Jewish refugee who had
fled Nazi Germany, shouted: "Nonsense". He was immediately manhandled and
ejected from the conference centre by bouncers.
This disgraceful incident, which goes against the whole tradition of the
labour movement, aroused the indignation of all the delegates who in a way
retaliated by defeating Blair and the labour leadership on three occasions.
They voted No to the privatisation of the health service, clearly rejected
raising the pension age from 60 to 65 in the public sector and passed a
motion demanding that the right to secondary action solidarity strikes-
should be reintroduced, in other words that Thatcher's anti-union laws,
which Blair has maintained, should be partly abolished.
These three demands, which express a rejection of Blair's policy imposed by
the European Union, were overwhelmingly approved by the conference.
The lesson I draw from all this is that nothing has been settled. The
activists that are devoted to their party, to the link which ties their
unions to their party, are telling Blair: "We won't let you destroy the
Labour party. We need our party, we need our unions if our demands are to be
satisfied.
At the conference they made it clear to him: "You won't have us silenced!"
That is also the meaning of the many letters I've been receiving in reply to
the Open Letter I sent to all the members of the party, as I am myself
threatened with expulsion.
I'm threatened with expulsion because in my local council I issued an appeal
against our own councillors forming a coalition with those of the
Conservative party and against the privatisations this coalition immediately
led to. I'm asking the questions everybody is asking. Aren't we allowed to
say another policy is needed, which would promote the interests of the
working-class? Aren't we allowed to say that Blair can't possibly implement
such a policy and consequently that he should go?
I'll take the example of this trade-unionist who writes:" I totally agree
with you. To night, I've got a branch meeting. I'm going to put forward a
motion against the privatisation of the post-office." I can also mention
this local councillor, who has been a member of the party for more than
forty years and says he has sent a letter of protest to the national
leadership. Another one writes: "I entirely agree with you. I'll never
support an alliance with Conservatives of the Liberal Democrats. It is in
direct contradiction with the reasons why I joined in 1956." They're talking
about their party. It was built to give political representation to the
working-class organised in trade-unions. When you defend the party, you are
fighting against the privatisation of the post-office and in support of all
the other demands.
Finally, I received this letter from a member of the party: "I'm regarded as
a Blairite, I don't agree with you on a number of issues, but you have the
right to express your own views."
She articulates a genuine voice on the way activists are deeply attached to
democracy. More than ever, the question is to defend the Labour party
against Blair. Blair must be removed to defend the Labour party.
Today there is a proposal from the government submitted to every union for
ratification. It affects 3 million public sector workers. It states that
pension age should be maintained at 60 for present public sector workers
while the new recruits will have to work until 65, and thus be brought into
line with the private sector. The proposal stipulates those future workers
will also be free to choose to retire at 60 with a smaller pension unless
they top up their contributions through an additional scheme. It's the
tailor-made retirement system advocated by the European Union. In practice
there will be two types of status and when there is a two-tier system,
three-tier if you are in the higher education sector, in reality there is
only one type of system that will be imposed in the end. I think such an
agreement cannot be ratified. What all public sector workers demand is 60
for all. Full stop.
Academies and the Education White paper
Rochdale MBC has been informed in no uncertain terms that they have to
establish a city academy. The school identified is Queen Elizabeth's School
in Middleton. The multimillionaire local sponsor is Dave Crossland of "My
Travel", who is reported to be willing to donate £1m. There will be further
match funding of £1m together with £18m from central government coffers.
The Council has already embarked on a PFI programme with private partners to
build and operate new schools, coupled with a school closure programme due
to falling pupil roles.
How is a new city academy going to impact on current school provision
locally?
The impact zone is clearly doing to be the existing schools in the Heywood
area. At least 2 secondary schools will be in line for closure as a direct
result of opening a new city academy with Sixth Form provision. But isn't
it government policy to abolish Sixth Forms?
The government's £5bn academy programme is designed to tackle educational
under achievement in some of the country's most disadvantaged communities.
They have already been accused of turning their back on poor pupils and
"cherry-picking" more able children from middle-class families. Figures
obtained by the Guardian show that the percentage of pupils from less
affluent families has dropped, in some cases dramatically, at almost two
thirds of academies, when compared with the "failing" schools they replaced.
City academies are exempt from the agreement to end the two-tier workforce.
This means that they will be able to employ staff on the cheap or transfer
staff under worse conditions. Unions fear future employees could become
vulnerable if individual academies reject unionisation. After three years
LEA's will have no say in the new schools admission policy either.
In the city academy in Brent opened by Tony Blair in 2003, 8 out of its 13
governors, including the community governor, are appointed by its sponsor
Sir Frank Lowe, it has only 1 parent governor, 1 teacher governor, 1
non-teaching staff governor and one LEA governor plus the head teacher.
Nobody has yet explained why a Blair government has felt it necessary to
introduce city academies in order to improve certain schools, to:
1. Take them out of their LEA control;
2. Make them Independent Schools unaccountable to their local community;
3. Allow them to be partially selective;
4. Remove them from the local community of schools;
5. Spend twice as much on their building between £20-£30m) as for an LEA
school;
6. Provide ongoing state funding equivalent to that of a specialist school;
7. Hide their financial arrangements under a cloud of 'commercial secrecy';
8. Free them from the requirements of the national Curriculum;
9. Remove the national arrangements from the pay and conditions of their
staff;
10. Rule out the requirement and safeguard for their teachers to be
registered with the General teaching Council; and
11. Hand them and their publicly funded assets over to a commercial sponsor
with no experience of running schools.
City academies and the white paper are part of the battery the Blair
government is using to break up and destroy our comprehensive system of
secondary education.
If we are to produce a cohesive society we need to educate children of all
creeds together and inform them of all beliefs. Instruction in the beliefs
of any individual religion is for the church, mosque or temple to provide
not the state.
In the education White Paper ' Higher Standards, better Schools for all' the
prime minister has got it wrong. He just does not understand what will
happen to schools if these divisive and unsound proposals are put into
practice.
The continuous changes in education since 1997 are making it impossible for
schools to deliver. A pupil spends 10-12 years in schooling up to 16. Since
1997 there have been almost as many Education White Papers/ Bills/Acts! And
the latest one, far from creating any real 'choice' for parents will produce
anarchy rather than diversity. Some schools specialist, some academies, some
collaborative, some selective, some popular, some shunned : all state
independent schools, in trusts, autonomously managed, deciding their own
admission policy, recruiting their own teachers, determining their own
curriculum: some run by churches, some by parents, some by millionaires.
Goodbye local authorities, welcome chaos!
All Labour MPs in parliament must vote against the white paper that will
support changes that will introduce more schools that are privately owned
and managed but publicly funded, that divide and undermine neighbouring
schools, that will deprive primary schools of capital funding, that make
nonsense of attempts to plan post 16 provision through the Learning and
Skills Council, that appear on present evidence to 'cherry pick' more able
and middle class pupils. And all on insufficient evidence of success or
that there will be a positive effect overall on the education service!
- APPEAL-
No to flexible pension schemes !
No to two tier pensions in public services
The rule must remain 60 for all public services workers
At a meeting with Alan Johnson, Secretary of State on 18th October 2005
public sector trade unions received details of a final set of principles for
public service pension submitted for approval..
This document allows for new pension schemes for new joiners based on a
higher retirement age of 65.
Trade unions are asked to endorse this proposal. The details are to be
worked out in specific negotiations for each scheme.
What do the Government's proposals mean?
It means that the single rule by which the age of retirement for all public
services workers is set at the age of 60 will be replaced with two options.
One scheme for existing employees and another for new joiners. Two systems
will cohabit within the same sector.
As Brian Strutton, GMB National Secretary for the Public Services Section
said: "The protection that this deal brings to two million public sector
workers comes at a price which is to concede worse terms based on a
retirement age of sixty five for new starters. This creates two tier
pensions in public services, which GMB has campaigned vigorously against".
The Government's proposal is not acceptable.
It would be a major blow against equality of treatment to which all public
sector workers should be entitled in a democracy.
Who can warrant that the introduction of the new system for new comers will
not be used as a stepping stone to finally extend the age of retirement to
65 for all public services workers ?
Especially when:
- this is precisely what the European Union recommends when it encourages
governments to introduce an " a la carte " system.
- this is what happened wherever a two tier system has been introduced in
Europe
- In a press release published on 10/10/2005 , the OECD - one of the big
financial institutions of globalisation- states :" The OECD recommends that
" governments should ensure that pensions and other welfare arrangements
encourage rather than discourage work at older ages"
They wish to suppress any reference to a set age of retirement !
It is unacceptable.
The rule must remain 60 for all as was clearly demanded by the trade unions
at the last TUC and Labour party conference.
For those who will negotiate on our behalf the mandate must be: "the 200
year rule must remain 60 for every NHS, civil servant , teacher and local
government worker. This is the only possible basis for negotiation because
this is the demand ".
Please return endorsements to: ste-@macunlimited.net
NAME /ORGANISATION ADDRESSS SIGNATOR /
DONATION
Name........................................................................
.................................................................
Address.....................................................................
.................................................................
Union.......................................................................
..................................................................
Branch......................................................................
.................................................................
Phone / Fax /
Email.......................................................................
.............................................
Edited by THE LINK: 31 Spotland Road, Rochdale OL12 6PE.
Tel/Fax: 01706 642899 Mobile: 07901 913698
Email:ste-@macunlimited.net
MANCHESTER CONFERENCE INVITATION
ENDORSEMENT COUPON
Please reply to: ste-@macunlimited.net
* I endorse the PROPOSAL TO HOLD A MANCHESTER CONFERENCE:
AFTER BRIGHTON: KICK OUT BLAIR TO DEFEND THE LABOUR PARTY
VENUE:CENTRAL METHODIST HALL,
OLDHAM STREET, MANCHESTER
(just off Piccadilly Gardens)
Manchester, M3 1SW
Date: SATURDAY DECEMBER 17th
Time:12.00-4.00pm
(ROOM: LOUNGE)
Name........................................................................
.................................................
Address.....................................................................
................................................
Union.......................................................................
..................................................
CLP.........................................................................
....................................................
Branch......................................................................
...................................................
Phone/Fax...................................................................
...........
Email.......................................................................
.................
To organise the MANCHESTER conference will require financial support to
print and distribute the BULLETIN and the INVITATION and hire a central
venue in MANCHESTER and have at least a minimal level refreshments provided.
To maintain our political independence we refuse sponsorship from any
governmental body or international financial institution. We rely on
donations exclusively from Labour and trade union units and individual
party-union members. Please make a contribution however small.
PLEASE MAKE CHEQUES PAYABLE TO:
"S. CHOLEWKA (The LINK)"
Subscribe to:
- The LINK-
OPEN FORUM OF LABOUR PARTY MEMBERS
AND TRADE UNIONISTS TO RECLAIM THE PARTY
Please reply to ste-@macunlimited.net
Subscription for 1 Year : £12 [ ]
Subscription Support : £20 [ ] £15 [ ] £10 [ ] £5 [ ]
I Order.......copies (50p per copy)
MAKE CHEQUES PAYABLE TO:
"S. CHOLEWKA (The LINK)"
Stefan CHOLEWKA,
31 Spotland Road
Rochdale
OL12 6PE
Tel/Fax: 01706 642899
Mobile: 07901 913698
Email: ste-@macunlimited.net
|
|
 |
|
