FBU calls for Labour recall conference

By Martin Thomas

The Fire Brigades Union [FBU] is calling for an emergency recall Labour Party conference to protect democracy in the party.

FBU general secretary Matt Wrack announced the call at an online meeting on 7 February attended by over 400 Labour Party people and organised to demand the reinstatement of dozens of Constituency and branch Labour Party officers.

The dozens were suspended for allowing debate on critical motions following Jeremy Corbyn’s suspension, reinstatement, and withdrawal of the whip.

Other speakers included Tony Kearns, deputy general secretary of the post and telecom union CWU, and Ian Hodson, president of the Bakers’ Union. Unite assistant general secretary Howard Beckett was billed but absent with internet difficulties.

The Skwawkbox blog reports that 50 of those suspended have been reinstated (though with a warning, or “reminder of conduct”, finding them guilty of “not following the guidance of the General Secretary”). Alan Gibbons, secretary of Walton CLP, chaired the 7 February meeting and told it that he had a reinstatement letter, but other speakers said that only one other letter had yet definitely been received.

An analysis by John Stewart counts 91 CLPs passing motions which might have flouted the General Secretary’s bans, and 29 with officers suspended, a total of 56 individuals. That may not be all.

Skwawkbox claims, plausibly, that the reinstatements were due to Labour Party HQ fearing that it would lose legal cases over the suspensions.

Sadly, some speakers in the 7 February meeting identified the key problem with Keir Starmer as him having been too anti-Brexit. No one mentioned the background fact of the EHRC [Equality and Human Rights Commission] finding on Labour antisemitism. No-one talked about tackling antisemitism in Labour, although one of the big issues of the current clampdown is the barring of local Labour Party plans to organise educationals about antisemitism.

12 councils to follow Croydon

By Alan Gilbert

According to the Financial Times of 9 February, quoting local government finance expert Bob Whiteman, at least 12 further local authorities are on the brink as budget-making for 2021-22 approaches.

In November, Croydon’s Labour council issued a “section 114” notice, an emergency freeze on spending because it couldn’t balance its budget. Whiteman says the 12 are “the tip of the iceberg”. Six may avoid “section 114” by doing deals with the government to shift spending into capital accounts.

The Tories have cut some £15 billion from central government funding to councils since 2010. In 2020-1 councils have spent more and got in less income because of the pandemic, with the gap only part-filled by extra cash from Westminster. The impact varies widely between councils. Many have lost heavily from commercial ventures made for alternative income.

• London local government trade unionists and Labour activists have called a meeting on 23 February (7 p.m. on Zoom) to rally campaigns against cuts

Starmer’s speech to Labour councillors: reasonable analysis, but what solutions?

By Mohan Sen

On 6 February, Keir Starmer spoke to a conference of the Labour group on the Local Government Association of councillors.He began with extravagant praise for various council leaders, and throughout the speech blurred between the idea that Labour councils are in a very difficult situation (true) and that their records are ones to be proud of (not true).In terms of the problems councils face, Starmer’s speech looked in the right direction. “Westminster has held onto powers that would be far better exercised [locally]… over the last decade, councils in England have seen their core funding cut by £15bn. Local government across the country is now facing a huge funding gap. It’s a shameful story… that story is about the long retreat of local government power in this country. It’s a story of centralisation and continuous cuts…“Thatcher, of course, wanted to turn back the post-war welfare state – but she didn’t want to return any power to local authorities. On the contrary, she wanted to crush local government, and cut funding even further. That was bad enough. But it was just a prelude to the assault on local government that occurred after 2010.”

Starmer referred positively to the expansion of local government powers in the late 19th century and to the post-war era.On the other hand he also referred positively to the Blair year, when councils did not experience swingeing cuts, but became ever more tightly limited by central government and ever less democratic in how they were run (cabinets, executive mayors, etc). During those years Labour council leaders pushed privatisation, outsourcing and the like with enthusiasm. All that should certainly give pause.Starmer gave a string of figures about the “local institutions [that] have disappeared” (youth centres, Sure Start centres, libraries, etc.)He promised to “keep pushing the Chancellor to provide the funding councils need – and were promised”. He gave no figure. He certainly did not commit to demanding and implementing reversal of all funding cuts the Tories have made since 2010.

Nor are Labour council leaders actively campaigning for that. Although they did call for it in 2018, through the Breaking Point campaign, they quietly abandoned the campaign and the demand only months later. The Corbyn leadership failed to back it, and certainly did not campaign to reverse all local government cuts – only to suddenly, at the last minute, drop a similar policy into the 2019 manifesto. Our council and party leaders, right and left, share responsibility for the failure to properly campaign to save local government services.In his speech Starmer promised to “end the long retreat of local government. And to empower our local leaders and local communities like never before.”There are very few details – and some references to regional devolution which, like the positive reference to Blair, suggest small, elected bodies or individual mayors covering very large regions, rather than genuinely re-empowered and meaningfully democratic local councils. The difference is crucial if we want to win radical, pro-working class policies and start to reshape society.Labour activists and trade unionists should push for more details, for genuine debate in the party, for a real re-empowerment of local government which must begin with massive investment in councils, reversing the damaging decade of cuts.

• Read Keir Starmer’s full speech at https://labour.org.uk/press/full-text-of-keir-starmers-speech-to-lga-labour-conference

• See also “A letter to my fellow Labour councillors” at https://leftfootforward.org/2021/01/stand-up-and-fight-back-an-open-letter-to-my-fellow-labour-councillors

Free Our Unions motion for Labour party conference

The pandemic, in which many workers have needed to take fast, decisive action to guarantee safety for themselves, their loved ones, and the wider community, without going through an arduous bureaucratic process, has underscored the need to scrap all anti-strike laws. So does the wave of job cuts and attacks on terms and conditions (e.g., “fire and rehire”).

Other anti-strike laws, such as the ban on workers striking in solidarity with other workers, and on striking over political issues, are also an affront to democracy and a brake on democratic action. They prevent workers from taking action directly over issues such as climate change or racism.

Conference denounces the Tories’ plan to impose new restrictions on transport workers through a “minimum service requirement”. It seems likely they will extend this to other groups of key workers.

Conference notes TUC Congress 2020 agreed to “organise a special conference… on opposing the anti-union laws” and a national demonstration. The party should encourage CLPs to support and get involved in these when they become possible.

Conference reaffirms the party’s opposition to all anti-union and anti-strike legislation, its commitment to repealing all such laws when next in government, and to legislating to enshrine workers’ rights to, as per TUC policy: “join, recruit to, and be represented by an independent union; strike/take industrial action by a process, at a time, and for demands of their own choosing, including in solidarity with any other workers, and for broader social and political goals; and picket freely”. (249 words)

Pandemic or no pandemic: attack poverty and inequality

Proposed motion for Labour Party conference 2021, submitted by Southampton Momentum to the Momentum policy process for Labour conference.

Inequalities have worsened the impact of the pandemic; the pandemic has worsened inequalities.

The Marmot report “Build Back Fairer” says: “mismanagement during the pandemic, and the unequal way the pandemic has struck, is of a piece with what happened… in the decade from 2010… enduring social and economic inequalities… mean that public health was threatened before and during the pandemic and will be after.”

We commit to campaigning for and implementing:

Benefits increased to a liveable level. £260pw Universal Credit (TUC demand).
Extension and strengthening of furlough and self-employment schemes.
Increase in the minimum wage to £12ph, scrapping exemptions and differentials. Action to increase wages; substantial increases for public-sector workers.
The right to isolate on full pay; improved sick pay for all, 100% of wages for at least a period.
Repeal of all anti-union laws.
Banning of zero-hours contracts.
Reversal of all cuts since 2010, increased funding.
Comprehensive reversal of privatisation and outsourcing; full public ownership of health and social care.
Abolition of ‘No Recourse to Public Funds’.
Building of at least 100,000 council homes a year.
Creation of millions of secure, well-paid, public jobs in services and green industry.

The Resolution Foundation and Wealth Tax Commission estimate that concentration of wealth in the hands of the super-rich is even worse than previously thought – by £800bn! We need to take back wealth, including through a wealth tax, increased corporation tax, capital gains tax and taxing very high incomes; and taking banking and finance into democratic public ownership.

(247 words)

Penistone & Stocksbridge CLP call for antisemitism education

Motion passed by the CLP

Antisemitism is a genuine problem in the Labour Party; denying or minimising that obstructs our ability to tackle it. But an approach that views antisemitism as something that can be addressed primarily through technical bureaucratic measures shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how to challenge it. A serious political intervention to tackle antisemitism should begin with a campaign of education that allows members to first recognise and then challenge the reactionary thinking that underpins it. Labour can only now do so effectively if it facilitates debate and organises political education enabling members to recognise antisemitism in its various forms – including those which disguise themselves in the language of the left.

This branch proposes that our political educational officer will form a working group with other interested members and meet with members of Sheffield Heeley executive who have taken the lead on organising educational sessions for their wider membership, with a view to organising a series of discussions along the lines of the model they have successfully implemented in their constituency.
https://labourlist.org/2020/08/how-our-local-party-developed-an-educational-programme-on-antisemitism/

Educational event about antisemitism stopped

An educative event which was being organised by Lewes CLP, about challenging antisemitism, has been banned by order of the Labour Party’s South East Regional Office. Mark Perryman, a member of Lewes branch (though not the organiser of the event) spoke to us in a personal capacity to explain what has been going on. 

The EHRC report was published and Jeremy Corbyn was almost immediately suspended. We had a branch meeting to discuss this. We weren’t of a mood to challenge David Evans or Keir Starmer or our Region on Jeremy’s suspension: hardly anyone could see the point of that, all that would result in is the CLP being closed down. But we wanted to state clearly that we didn’t believe that bureaucratic suspensions were the answer. Most importantly, we felt that we needed, as a branch to make clear that, in the words of the motion I put “our opposition to anti-semitism is unconditional”. As I said moving the motion: if a Muslim woman outside a supermarket in Lewes was being abused, we wouldn’t ask her position on feminism. We’d oppose the abuse.

I lived for some years in Stamford Hill, where there is a large Jewish community. If I saw a Hasidic Jew being abused in antisemitic terms, as happened quite regularly, I wouldn’t ask his or her position on Israel. I would oppose the abuse. That’s not to say that I’m not in favour of Palestinian self-detrmination. I absolutely am. But that’s not the issue there.

The problem is that the Labour Party as a broad church is not capable of giving political education – whose ideas would the substance of that education? One year Jeremy Corbyn’s, the next Keir Starmer’s? So we decided to provide what I called an educative space. People would bring their views to that space for a discussion. We were aware that people might come with antisemitic views, and we’d challenge them. So that was the idea.

Very interesting people were involved in leading on this project, Gaby Weiner, who has written a book, Tales of Loving and Leaving, about her family’s history of persecution at the hands of antisemites in central Europe; and Palo Almond, one of the few BAME officers in the entire South East Region of the Labour Party, an experienced educationalist. These two people collaborated on this, devising a programme on the history of antisemitism. This was regarded as uncontroversial in the CLP. There is a variety of views in the CLP, we nominated Keir and Angela in yhe leadership elections. Our CLP is not a part of the hard left but it sees itself as providing a space for ideas. Since 2018, we have been organising big “ideas events” which draw crowds of hundreds. We have a national reputation for this. 

Our antisemitism event was announced along with the names of the session leaders in an email to members. And then a day before the event was due to take place, another email had to be sent quoting South East Region’s directive 48 hours ahead of the session, saying that we were banned from having this educative event. So imagine you’re a member, not very involved in the ins and outs of the branch, and you get an email saying that there’s going to be a series of educative events on antisemitism, then the day before you get an email saying that they’re not allowed to take place. The clear inference of this is that the two named indivduals involved are not capable of giving education about antisemitism, or even are suspected of antisemitism! So we are up in arms about this. Again, we didn’t see the point in defying this directive, we don’t want to get suspended, but we are making every effort to contest this directive.

So now we’re stuck. We are told we can’t have a discussion about antisemitism and one is needed. We have a members-only Facebook Page, and the moderators had to remove some comments because they were antisemitic. These were what I’d call simple-minded conspiracy thinking. ‘The media is run by billionaires, lots of billionaires are Jewish’. That kind of thing. Or I’ve opened a discussion, and twice I found myself replying to people criticising Israel – criticisms I agree with – but they were using the word “Jew” where they should have used the word “Israeli”. That’s the kind of ideas that we’d want to address with an event like this.

There has been a response to David Evans’ office, we sent a considered explanation of our concerns, and a two-line answer has come back: a response essentially treating us as idiots. 

The EHRC report makes no mention at all of banning educative events amongst members. What it specifies is that there needs to be careful preparation for training staff. So people who are waving this report in our faces haven’t even read it!

Safe & Equal campaign lobbies councils

Safe and Equal

Safe and Equal is campaigning for full isolation pay for all, and particularly for careworkers. It calls on supporters to lobby councils about careworkers. The first stage is to email councillors with a model letter.

Second stage: put a question to the health and social care scrutiny committee. Inform Safe and Equal about the reply you get.

Email Safe and Equal if you want to join its next open organising meeting 6pm, Wednesday 27 January.