Communities under pressure need public services not council cuts

Last Thursday, hundreds of angry residents packed into the Honor Oak Community Centre to attend a meeting called to discuss the violent death of two teenagers on the Turnham estate in the last few weeks. 

There was plenty of emotion on display, as well as anger - anger at the loss of life, at the lack of support for the family of local victim Shaquan, and at the pressures facing the local community as a whole.

Many different contributions were made from both invited speakers and from people in the audience. Concerns about racism and about knife-crime amongst black youth in particular featured significantly throughout the evening. 

Lee Jasper, opening the meeting, pointed to the racism still ingrained in our society evidenced by the disproportionately high levels of poverty and unemployment facing black communities. The mother of the black teenager shot at Streatham Ice Rink back in 2007 talked tearfully of the wasted lives of both the victims and the youth behind bars facing indeterminate sentences for 'joint enterprise'.

A common theme raised was the decline in 'social solidarity', in opportunities for communities to work together, of the need for fathers to engage with their sons. However, some of the most powerful contributions focused on the collective pressures on families struggling to make a living and to support their children while services were cut and real incomes were falling.

A young man, Marlon, delivered an angry diatribe to the local politicians on the panel, pointing to the cuts to Sure Start, Connexions and Youth Services. He complained about 'gentrification' and plans to build more housing on the estate, supposedly social housing but, as a young woman behind me shouted out, "it's NOT affordable!".

A young woman speaking on behalf of Shaquan's mother Sharon, pointed to the reality facing so many working parents, not least Sharon herself. Sharon hadn't been able to stop to grieve; she had no choice but to carry on working at her local hairdressers to pay her rent. This was an estate where most people were in work, but where too many had to rely on food banks because of low pay. Turning to Lewisham Cabinet member Janet Daby, who had offered little more than the need to 'give youth wisdom' and the importance of 'Operation Black Vote', the young woman said pointedly, "why should we vote, when we don't trust you?" adding, "why should youth talk to the police when they don't trust them either?"

Needed - a Party that will fight cuts and racism

Alienated and angry communities like this urgently need a Party that can earn their trust by showing that they are genuinely prepared to fight poverty and racism, by refusing to carry out Tory cuts, fighting for a £10 an hour minimum wage and ending the housing policies that are leading to the 'social cleansing' of working -class communities across London.

Will a Corbyn-led Labour provide that Party? As things stand locally, it appears not. Councillors offered condolences and fine words but little more. Newly-elected local Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft offered even less, replying to the young residents with the excuse that "the political reality is that it's the Conservative Government's cuts". That was meant with shouts of derision and the MP sat down silently for the rest of the meeting.

A Lewisham Council Officer had earlier spoken to the meeting about what the Council were doing to help with 'crime reduction'. Yet, as part of the £40 million of cuts made last year, Lewisham Council chopped £1 million from its Crime Reduction Budget! Worse, its report on one of those cuts spelt out bluntly what such a cut would mean to black youth in particular: "As young men from BME communities are over represented in the criminal justice system the impact there is likely to be increased". 

Not surprisingly, the Officer also didn't reveal the further  'savings proposal' to her service discussed at the previous night's Mayor and Cabinet meeting. It suggested a possible further £2.5 million cut in the 'Crime Reduction and Supporting People' budget that will mean "reduced support for mental health, learning disability and single homeless clients" which might lead to "a rise in Anti Social Behaviour on the streets" - in their words, not mine!

That's just one cut amongst a further £45 million planned over the next two years - from a Council budget that has already been slashed by £120M - one-third - since 2010. That could include a further £6M from Adult Social Care, £3.6M from Environmental Services, £1M more cut from grants to voluntary sector organisations, £300K further cuts to Youth Services and £1M cut more from the libraries budget.

Already, however, it's clear that trade unionists and communities are getting prepared to fight those cuts. A Lobby of the next Mayor and Cabinet meeting discussing the budget, on Wednesday December 9th, is being planned. A Save Lewisham Libraries website has been launched explaining why the plans for more volunteer-run 'community libraries' has to be opposed. UNISON members are asking supporters to sign their online petition and attend the first public consultation meeting on the library cuts, on Wednesday 7th October, 7.30pm at the Broadway Theatre in Catford.

Fight the cuts, instead of just voting for them!

I hope the anger shown at the meeting sent the politicians who attended home to think again about their role in passing on Tory cuts. Labour councillors can't claim to stand against racism and poverty while they preside over cuts to communities that already have their backs to the wall.

As TUSC and the Socialist Party have explained, Labour councillors could choose to lead a fight, instead of just meekly passing on cuts. If they did, they would get massive support - including from embittered and embattled communities like those on the Turnham estate. For example, the council unions across Glasgow Council have come together to demand their councillors say 'No More Cuts'. I'll leave the final word to those unions - but theirs is a rallying cry that needs to be repeated by trade unions and communities across England, Scotland and Wales: 

"Politicians have a choice – make the Tory cuts or do not. We call on all elected politicians in the city to use all available financial mechanisms to hold-off any further cuts whilst leading a fight to win more money for the city. The council could use some of its reserves and borrowing powers, supported by the legal financial process of “capitalisation”, to ... allow time and space to build a mass campaign of elected councillors, trade unions, user groups and local communities with the objective of winning more money from the Holyrood and Westminster governments. There is plenty of money in our economy – it is just in the wrong hands or lying in the bank accounts of big business. The trade unions will support any council politician or council political grouping who adopts this strategy of “No More Cuts”.

No Tory cuts, No Labour Cuts - build an anti-austerity alternative with TUSC

Tonight, Lewisham’s Mayor and Cabinet approved recommendations to go to next week’s Full Council meeting confirming a further £40 million of cuts for 2015/16.

Those cuts come on top of around £100 million of cuts that have already been made since 2010. Staff numbers have already been cut by a third, and are due to fall even further.

A further £85m of savings was already planned from 2015/16 to 2017/18. However, as tonight’s papers spelt out “Following the Chancellors announcement in the Autumn Statement of a further £10 billion [sic] of cuts to public sector expenditure these estimates are likely to worsen”.

What the Lewisham Council report fails to point out is that it wasn’t just the Coalition parties that backed the Chancellor’s austerity plans. Osborne’s plans for billions of pounds of further cuts passed through Parliament by a massive 515 votes to 18. Just five Labour MP’s were prepared to defy the whip and vote against them!

The fact is that, whichever combination of the main parties forms the Government after May’s general election it will really just be a 'change of management' only. They will all continue to inflict cuts on local government that will bring councils down to the bare legal minimum of service provision and in some cases below even that. At the same time, as the HSBC scandals are showing, the super-rich continue to squirrel away their billions. What kind of society is it that sees the 1% continue to profit at the expense of the 99%?

This continuing austerity, and the failure of the Labour Party to challenge it, shows the desperate need to building a new mass party for working people. Events in Greece have already led to the election of anti-austerity party Syriza, and in Spain there is a surge in popularity for Podemos too.

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) is planning to stand 1,000 council candidates and 100 parliamentary candidates in May's elections, in order to start building that alternative to the pro-austerity status-quo. 

The lesson from these cuts is not to vote for the austerity parties on 7 May. Instead trade unions and communities need to prepare for the battles to come whoever wins. That’s why I am calling on voters in Lewisham West and Penge to support my TUSC challenge this May.

Join the Anti-Cuts Lobbies: No Tory cuts, no Labour cuts!
Bromley:
Monday 23 February, 6.00 pm, Bromley Civic Centre
Lewisham:
Wed. 25 February, 6.00 pm, Catford Town Hall - 
followed by Stop Academies in Lewisham Public Meeting, 
7.30 pm, St.Mary's Centre, Ladywell.

Lewisham Council Cuts - "When Services Go, People Suffer"

As Lewisham is dubbed the “most violent place to live in the country”, Lewisham Council prepares to finalise a £1 Million cut in its Crime Reduction budget.

According to today’s Evening Standard, Lewisham has been rated in the “UK Peace Index” Report, calculated using rates of homicide, weapons crime and other factors, as the least ‘peaceful’ Local Authority in Britain.

The press are happy to sensationalise crime while failing to condemn the poverty which this report shows is at the root of the problem. Lewisham residents also know that headlines like the Standard’s can exaggerate most people’s everyday experience. However, for those people who have been victims of crime, particularly youth, the effects can be long-lasting.

What is Lewisham Council’s response? It is to finalise a £40 million cuts package being voted on at the Mayor and Cabinet meeting on Wednesday February 11th. Alongside a £1M cut to the Crime Reduction budget, these cuts include a shocking £9.7M reduction in Health and Social Care budgets and a cut in the community grants budget by up to £1.5M.

The proposed cuts to the Crime Reduction budget are:
· £604k to be cut from Drug and Alcohol Services, including residential rehabilitation.
· £200 k in cuts to the Youth Offending Service
· £200K from cuts to the Integrated Offender Management Service

The Council’s own papers from last September, when these cuts were first considered, admitted that these cuts will come at a cost. For example, on the IOM proposal, it said:

“Those who are involved in the criminal justice system are notoriously difficult to engage in drug/alcohol treatment services. Without additional support this engagement is even less likely which means that their criminal activity is likely to continue with all the associated impacts on other Lewisham residents”.

“Generally the impact of the service will be on those who would otherwise receive it. As young men from BME communities are over represented in the criminal justice system the impact there is likely to be increased. There is also a general impact on those who are victims of crime and the same group are again over represented”.

Martin Powell-Davies, prospective parliamentary candidate in Lewisham West and Penge for TUSC, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition, said:

“These cuts can only further damage our community. It doesn't matter if the cuts are carried out enthusiastically by Tories, like neighbouring Bromley, or with a heavy heart by Labour in Lewisham. When services go, people suffer.

Instead of crying crocodile tears, Lewisham’s Labour Councillors should stand by the needs of local people and refuse to carry them out. Like TUSC, they should demand that the next Government stops the cuts and funds services to meet needs.

TUSC is one of the local groups and trade unions supporting a Lobby of Lewisham Council to protest against the cuts on Wednesday 25th February, from 6.30 pm outside the Town Hall”.

1: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/london-is-home-to-the-uks-ten-most-violent-places-to-live-8585956.html

2: http://councilmeetings.lewisham.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=119&MId=3450

A Victory over Maternity Cuts in Lewisham

No need for a full Lobby in the end - but some couldn't resist a small celebration!

At the conclusion of negotiations this afternoon, I was very pleased to be able to post the following report on the Lewisham NUT website:

 Lewisham NUT are pleased to confirm that, following discussions between Unions and Council Officers at the Corporate Joint Committee this afternoon, the proposal to cut the number of weeks of contractual pay from 20 half-weeks to 12 half-weeks has been withdrawn.

I am pleased to say that, having checked the comparative data compiled by the NUT, Officers have recognised that their proposal would have made Lewisham’s provisions considerably inferior to those applying in most other Inner London boroughs. Today’s decision means that the existing contractual provisions will remain in place, namely, for those with sufficient qualifying service, 6 weeks at 90% of pay and 20 weeks at 50% (plus SMP). 

While teachers will now be aware as a result of the NUT’s analysis that some other boroughs have greater contractual pay totals, the NUT is pleased that Lewisham’s continuing provisions will now remain better than the national ‘Burgundy Book’ provisions applying in some Outer London boroughs.

The only change that will be made is that the maximum 52 weeks of maternity leave that can be taken overall will now commence at the start of maternity leave, rather than on the date of childbirth. This brings Lewisham in line with practice in most other boroughs. However, notice will be given before this change is applied, and will not be introduced until September at the earliest, possibly January.

The outcome of these negotiations will be a relief to the many teachers who had worried about the financial impact of the original proposals. It is only a pity that Officers had not recognised at an earlier stage what the NUT had been stating: firstly, how Lewisham would have looked in comparison with other boroughs and, secondly, how strongly teachers and other staff were opposed to the proposed change.

Council Officers have alerted unions that they believe that other London Councils may be looking to change their provisions in future, and that national changes to legislation may require provisions to be looked at again in future. If so, then, firstly, those other councils will also quickly come to recognise that cuts to maternity pay will not be accepted by the NUT and other trade unions. If national legislation requires changes then, again, that will be an issue that the NUT will consider at the time. However, we will remain clear that cuts to maternity provisions are cuts that the NUT will not be prepared to accept.

Martin Powell-Davies, Secretary, Lewisham NUT  

June 11^th 2014.

Small victories raise confidence

– but what about the Labour Party?

It’s good to turn on your mobile to find that your overnight voicemail message is not the usual desperate cry for help from another bullied or harassed teacher but a shriek of joy from a school NUT rep who has just achieved a victory!

This morning’s triumphant message was from a Lewisham school rep who had just read my email confirming that their ‘action short of strike action’ had achieved a small but significant victory from the very start of the new campaign.

I had informed the Head that on Wednesday, the first day of the action, NUT members would be refusing to attend that day’s staff meeting, as it would be teachers’ second meeting of the week – outside Union guidelines. Her response – the meeting has now been cancelled !

That’s just one example of the small battles that are being won as reps and school groups meet to confirm the action they will be taking. These successes will lift confidence to build for the bigger national strike action that urgently needs to follow.

But the question that dominated the two largest meetings that I attended last week was “what about the Labour Party”.

Yesterday, I was asked to speak to a group of over 100 Danish teachers visiting London from a further education institution taking all their staff away together for a study tour. What a contrast from the meagre ‘how-we-meet-this-year’s-imposed-targets’ training days most teachers in England have to endure! Indeed, it was a sobering experience having to explain to these colleagues quite how bad our education system had become.

But the most revealing question asked by a Danish colleague was “what do you think of the Labour Party – do you think they will make any difference?” The doubtful tone of his voice, and the discussion that followed, showed only too clearly that it isn’t only in Britain where teachers are crying out for a genuine political alternative that will stand up against cuts and privatisation. Many shared exactly the same doubts and disappointments with their equivalent parties in Denmark as many NUT members do with Twigg and New Labour.

Earlier that week, the same debate had taken place in Lewisham Town Hall’s Council Chamber. This certainly didn’t include any councillors – who had all stayed away that night – but was part of a discussion amongst trade unionists at a public meeting called by Lewisham Trades Council to build for the TUC demonstration on October 20th.

The discussion around building for strike action was led by Mark Serwotka, PCS General Secretary, and there was overwhelming support for his call to build co-ordinated national strike action to oppose austerity.

However, the contribution from left-wing writer Owen Jones raised more disagreements. Owen spoke well about the need to reverse Tory cuts but then explained how he was working with a pressure group ‘CLASS’ to widen the debate within the Labour Party as to the way forward. As an article in this week’s Socialist (which Owen took away with him to read! http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/15311/26-09-2012/can-labour-give-a-lead-in-fight-against-austerity ) points out, some involved in CLASS certainly have no commitment to socialist ideas nor even to genuinely reclaiming the Labour Party as a force to support workers’ struggles.

There’s nothing wrong with having that debate within Labour but surely Owen’s energies would be far better used campaigning for a genuine workers’ voice rather than in a wasted attempt to try and rescue a New Labour party that has long since cut itself off from its past.

As I pointed out to Owen, the lack of a real alternative is sapping workers’ confidence when they are considering taking strike action against cuts. Many wonder how much would be achieved by defeating this Government if a New Labour administration would then carry on with exactly the same attacks. (In case any more evidence was needed, Ed Balls made another pro-cuts announcement in today's Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/9572944/Labour-will-be-ruthless-about-cutting-public-spending-says-Ed-Balls.html ).

Of course, a Government elected on the back of a determined campaign of trade union action would be under enormous pressure to change course from the present pro-cuts consensus. But, unlike SYRIZA in Greece, there are no significant forces within New Labour who are calling for real opposition to neo-liberal austerity.

Owen has correctly called for Labour Councils to start to stand up against the cuts but, with a tiny handful of honourable exceptions, Labour councillors and MPs show no sign of waging that fight. When they do, as in Southampton, they are disciplined! But I pointed out to Owen that Socialist Party councillors like Ian Page and Chris Flood had led exactly those kind of battles – against Labour cuts – from the seats we were sitting on in the Lewisham Council Chamber. Electing fighting trade unionists and socialists like that will put more pressure on New Labour than any pressure group like CLASS will ever do.

Of course, some in the meeting did not agree with me – but many did. Owen has accepted an invitation to continue this debate at the Socialist party’s weekend of discussion, Socialism 2012, in London on November 3-4. I’m looking forward to carrying on the debate! See: http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/events/Socialism_2012

For an interview I gave to 'the Socialist' on similar issues, please have a look on: http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/15359/03-10-2012/tory-education-policy-this-is-just-about-making-cuts-isnt-it

TUSC breaks through the media silence

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition is standing a list of leading trade unionists and anti-cuts campaigners on the London-wide list (on the orange ballot paper) in Thursday's election for the Greater London Assembly. I am proud to be on that list as a member of the NUT Executive - although in a personal capacity.

We are offering a real alternative to the agenda of cuts and privatisation of all the main parties. Given the serious challenge we offer, it's no real surprise that the media have been trying to throw a blanket of silence over the campaign.

But TUSC organiser Paula Mitchell managed to seize her chance on the BBC's Question Time last week. Have a look on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxnM82SRE_0

TUSC also has election broadcasts to watch and share. Have a look at the long version:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCPvcnDRboU&feature=youtu.be

or, if you're in a  hurry, the 2 minute broadcast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smOUN2wkKk4&feature=youtu.be

We need our own political voice, a trade unionist who will stand up in that Assembly and hold the Mayor - whoever is elected - and the Assembly members to account - and send them a clear message that trade unionists will fight their cuts!


So remind your family, friends, workmates and trade union colleagues to vote TUSC on May 3!

Learning how to win - like the Liverpool 47

Don’t Mention the 47

Screening (4.00 pm) & Discussion (5.15 - 6.15pm) - Sunday 29th April 2012

Roxy Bar & Screen, Borough High St, SE1 1LB

“Don’t Mention the 47”, made by Arti Dillon and Lisa Lonsdale, is an openly political documentary that re-opens a crucial chapter in Liverpool’s (& Britain's) working class history. Through a series of interviews the film gives voice to some of those who were closely involved, assembling an inspiring example of solidarity and resistance.

I am looking forward to this first screening of 'work-in-progress' of a film that records the achievement of the Liverpool 47 Councillors from 1983-1987. It can help to educate a new generation of trade unionists and anti-cuts campaigners about their struggle – and learn how they achieved their victory.

Significant victories are not easily won against a bosses’ Government. It takes determination, organisation and skilled leadership to defeat the wealthy with all the weapons that they have created to hold us back – their laws, their politicians and their press.

When they face a serious enemy, they use their press - and it really is their press as the revelations around Murdoch have again shown - to vilify leaders who, in Thatcher’s words about Liverpool “do not have enough respect for my office”. 

As Leon Trotsky put it – and he had good reason to know - “When it comes to a threat against their material interests, the educated classes set in motion all the prejudices and confusion which humanity is dragging in its wagon-train behind it”. 

In the case of Liverpool 47 of course, the vilification was led by Kinnock and other supposed Labour leaders. It helped set in train a counter-revolution that turned the Labour Party from an organisation that, with all its weaknesses, could be used to help build the struggles of working-people, into one that is just another party of capitalism.

Today’s Labour leaders, and the hundreds of career politicians and Labour councillors sitting in Town Halls across the country, certainly don’t want communities facing cuts, closures and privatisation of local services to be reminded that there was a Labour Council, yes a Labour Council, that was prepared to declare – like the Poplar councillors before them - that it was ‘better to break the law than break the poor’ – and, with the support of their communities and their workforce, refuse to carry out cuts.

Messrs Milliband and Balls will do nothing of the sort - they won’t even commit to reversing the ConDem cuts if elected. That’s why the NUT Annual Conference unanimously voted to condemn those Labour leaders and recommit to a policy of ‘No Cuts’. It’s also why those of us in the Socialist Party are fighting to build a new workers’ party and, with other socialists and, crucially, with the support of RMT, FBU and leading members of other trade unions, are fighting to win seats for the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition on May 3rd. 

For those who don't know the history, the http://www.liverpool47.org website helps to outline the events of that period - and lists the achievements of that victorious struggle - like the 5000 new homes that were built, the improvements in wages and conditions, the apprenticeships that were created.
 
NUT members, in the middle of our own battle to defend pensions from Tory cuts, could do well to consider how the Liverpool 47 led the movement to a victory. 

The NUT is a left-led union – certainly no longer a Union that would play a role to deliberately try to undermine the movement – as was regrettably the case with Liverpool NUT’s leadership in the ‘80s. But, regrettably, the NUT - a union with considerable potential power because of the economic effect of closing schools - is not on strike alongside the PCS, UCU, UNITE Health and others on May 10th . Indeed, unless urgent pressure is brought to bear on the NUT Executive majority, it looks like we might not be on strike in June either.

I can see first-hand how the fear of isolation, of attacks from the press, of lack in confidence in our members’ will to struggle – is dragging down Left leaders.

The French revolutionary Babeuf explained that, even for the most well-meaning leader, “it is only too easy to become discouraged by the difficulties and dangers involved in taking a case to the public, and only too tempting to conclude that the enterprise is hopeless before even putting the matter to the test”.

So it could have been with Liverpool. The Liverpool 47 were faced with the choice between making cuts – or carrying out its programme of protecting rents and creating jobs and homes. They could have retreated, like other councils did – including erstwhile Lefts like David Blunkett in Sheffield and, when put to the test, Ken Livingstone too during the 1985 ratecapping battles. But, instead, they were famously, "the city that dared to fight".

But to fight – and to win – requires a strategy. In Liverpool – and in the poll tax battle that also defeated Thatcher – it was the clear analysis of the socialists and marxists around Militant that helped guide the movement to victory. That doesn’t mean that, as in any battle, mistakes weren’t made. The decision by the Labour Group in 1985 to issue redundancy notices to gain the movement some financial breathing space was definitely a mistake, but an honest one, one that was then vilely seized upon by Neil Kinnock to slander the Liverpool 47.

The key strategy – which if there were a council with any kind of fighting leadership should be being followed today – was to identify the shortfall in the budget required to defend jobs and services – and then to launch a mass campaign to demand that money be restored to the city council.

First of all that meant clear and energetic explanation – going out to the workforce and local community to simply spell out the key facts in mass meetings, at trade union branches, on the factory gates, through door to door leafleting and canvassing. 

In Liverpool, the campaign was to explain to workers and the public why the Council needed to set a no-cuts budget and to campaign for the resources that had been stolen from the city to be returned – just as now, public sector unions need to be energetically exposing the blatant and unjustified robbery of our pensions and the attempts to increase pension ages to 68 and more.

It meant organisation - bringing together a campaign committee of public and private-sector trade unionists, tenants groups, women and youth; a vibrant District Labour Party; a thriving Joint Shop Stewards Committee to cut across the dead-hand of the full-time officials; and, of course, the meetings of Militant supporters to hammer out tactics and strategy too.

Above all, it meant having confidence and trust in the determination of working people to struggle – not in cross-class appeals to capitalist politicians and the Bishops that some saw as the way to win. If you can show that you have a serious program of action to meet the aspirations of ordinary working-class and middle-class people – for a decent job on a decent wage, a living pension in retirement, a decent place to live and a good school for your kids – then, if you give a lead, working people will follow and can surprise even the most 'Left’ of leaders with their determination, creativity and energy.
 
The struggle meant building and mobilising support for mass actions that would display the strength of the movement – the mass demonstration in November 1983, the city-wide strike of March 1984, leading to the further election victory in the 1984 council elections – which all helped force the Tories to concede £60 million - nearly all the money the campaign was seeking from the Government. 

There is no doubt that the Tories settled, in part, to allow them to concentrate on defeating the miners. But that wasn’t down to the Liverpool 47, nor the NUM - it was down to the leaders of the labour and trade union movement who, having refused to back the Liverpool struggle, left the miners isolated and without the solidarity action that could have driven back the Tories.

Once the miners were defeated, Thatcher was even more determined to defeat Liverpool. But the 1984 victory had encouraged 20 or so other Labour Councils to make a stand. Liverpool didn’t want to fight alone – but recognising the weaknesses of many of its allies in the other Labour Councils – was always prepared to do so if it had to. 

The NUT needs to take the same approach – and appeal to the NASUWT to join us in strike action over pensions – but be ready to fight without them if necessary.

Despite Liverpool’s efforts, the united front soon fell apart, as council after council abandoned the 'no rate' tactic. Liverpool was eventually left to fight alone. The unelected District Auditor was then sent in to surcharge councillors – for the terrible crime of not setting a rate for three months!

Everything was thrown at Liverpool to undermine the struggle. In the wake of the Heysel Stadium tragedy in April 1985, Liverpool was attacked as being a city run by bullies and barbarians - but who were the real bullies? Who stood for the widest debate and discussion in communities and trade unions? And who for overriding the democratic decisions of Liverpool voters?

The fact is that Thatcher could never defeat the Liverpool 47 democratically. Liverpool Labour won every election in that period and with some of the highest votes and electoral turnouts ever seen in the city – a testament to how the struggle lifted the level of understanding of workers across Liverpool. Turnouts in local elections were well over 50% - in Liverpool last year the turnout was 36%! 

After Kinnock's treacherous speech condemning Liverpool at the 1985 Labour Party Conference, Denis Healey told Kinnock his speech had won Labour the next general election. What happened? In the 1987 election Kinnock got the second lowest vote for Labour since 1931.

Attacked by the unelected courts - who ordered the Liverpool 47 out of office, by the Labour and trade union leaders, as well as by the Tories, the years from 1985 to 1987 were a period of orderly retreat – but one that still managed to hold out sufficiently to make sure, for example, that the housing programme could be completed. Those gains remain as a testament to the campaign of the Liverpool 47.

Trade unionists and socialists need to learn from history and from the struggles of the past, so as not to get thrown off course by this or that difficulty. In the period that followed in the 1990s and beyond, it seemed to some that capitalism had triumphed. However, it is now surely becoming crystal clear that it was only storing up even greater problems, problems that it is unable to resolve.

Therefore, with the help of this film, we need to remember the struggle of the Liverpool 47 in order to help us win mass struggles again – as part of a struggle for a socialist future. 

NUT Conference Report - Tuesday April 10

STOP PRESS: 14 NUT Executive members have requisitioned an emergency meeting of the National Executive in late April to discuss the strategy and action calendar for the pensions campaign.

Final Day's Report:
The final session of NUT Conference completed a number of important debates including those on workload, sixth form colleges, “a woman’s place is in the union” and against the forced academisation of primary schools (excellently seconded by Karen Parkinson from Lewisham NUT).

However, it was the debate on the motion on the ‘economy’ that most clearly revealed the overwhelming opposition of delegates from across the Union to cuts to pay, jobs, pensions and services – whether being carried out by Tory, Liberal Democrat or Labour politicians.

Jane Nellist from Coventry (who also topped the poll in the delegates’ ballot for the Conference Business Committee) seconded an amendment that “condemns the statements by Ed Milliband and Ed Balls that in office they would maintain the bulk of the Coalition Government’s spending cuts and austerity measures”. It also affirmed its solidarity with workers elsewhere, particularly in Greece, and instructed the executive to press the TUC to call another national demonstration against cuts and austerity as well.

Jane described the queues for food hand-outs in the centre of Coventry and contrasted that with the £730 billion in cash hoarded by big business, instead of being invested to meet the needs of society. She pointed out how cuts in her city had been started by a Tory Council under a Labour Government – and were now being made by a Labour Council under a Tory Government – a seamless transition. That’s why, Jane explained, she would be supporting anti-cuts candidates from the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition in the local elections on May 3.

But perhaps the most telling illustration of teachers’ opposition to cuts – from whatever party - was that not a single delegate chose to speak against the amendment - which was then overwhelmingly carried. The final amended motion, also reaffirming the Union’s policy of “no cuts”, was then agreed – unanimously!

RMT President heads list in trade union election challenge

 

Education is under attack from this Government: budgets are cut, schools facing forced privatisation, workload at intolerable levels - yet young teachers are told they should work until they’re 68!

But, shamefully, New Labour's leadership won't oppose these attacks: Ed Balls won’t reverse cuts, Stephen Twigg supports Free Schools , Ed Milliband opposes trade unionists striking to defend their pensions.

Teachers know they can’t just fight cuts and privatisation through trade union action alone. We also need political representatives that will speak out in support of union policies.

The London Assembly elections on May 3rd provides a great opportunity to elect candidates who will stand out against the pro-cuts consensus from all the main parties. An excellent list of trade unionist and socialist campaigners has now been agreed to stand in the London-wide list section. It has a real chance to succeed in electing at least one assembly member. This would be a real breakthrough for everyone who wants to defend education and public services from cuts and privatisation.

The list will be headed by Alex Gordon, National President of the RMT Union. I am also proud to be part of the list of candidates and pledge my full support to the campaign.

As Alex Gordon has said in the latest TUSC Press Release: (http://www.tusc.org.uk/press160212.php)

“We believe ordinary Londoners should have the choice of an alternative to the political consensus in favour of public spending cuts, privatisation and pay freezes advocated by all the three main parties. Recent statements by Labour Party leaders that in government they would not reverse Tory/Lib Dem spending cuts confirms that they do not offer working-class people an alternative and cannot be a viable opposition to the attacks on our communities and our public services.”
 

The full list will be:
Alex Gordon, president of RMT will head the list.
Nick Wrack, TUSC national committee
April Ashley, Unison executive, representing black women members
Sian Griffiths, FBU women's committee
Steve Hedley, RMT London organiser
Ian Leahair, FBU national committee member
Gary McFarlane, anti-racist activist
Martin Powell-Davies, executive member for Inner London of the NUT
Merlin Reader, CWU London committee
Joe Simpson, assistant general secretary of the POA
Jenny Sutton, UCU (FE) London committee
Nancy Taaffe, library worker made redundant, former chair Waltham Forest Unison
Jackie Turner, doctor and health campaigner
Lee Vernon, Young Members convenor for London PCS
Lesley Woodburn, unemployed, Unite rep on SERTUC LGBTQ committee 

Candidates are in a personal capacity

Public rally to launch London TUSC GLA campaign: 
Speakers: Bob Crow, TUSC candidates, plus others to be announced. If you live in London come along and get involved… Wednesday 21 March, 7.15pm at 235 Shaftesbury Avenue London WC2H 8EP

Get involved
If you live in London and want to get involved in the campaign, e-mail tuscbulletin@yahoo.co.uk with your borough.

Trade unionists challenge the main parties in the London Assembly elections

Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition MEDIA RELEASE

New left-wing coalition to challenge for a seat on London Assembly  

Candidates selected for the TUSC GLA list so far include (in alphabetical order):

April Ashley, UNISON National Executive Committee  
Alex Gordon, RMT President 
Steve Hedley, RMT London regional organiser 
Ian Leahair, FBU National Executive Committee
Martin Powell-Davies, NUT National Executive
Joe Simpson, POA assistant secretary
Jenny Sutton, UCU Chair, London Regional Committee (FE)
Nick Wrack, TUSC national committee member (former chair of Socialist Alliance and Respect)
There will also be candidates from the CWU postal union and the PCS public service workers union. 
(All standing in a personal capacity)

A new alliance, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC), made up of trade union members and socialists, is to stand candidates in the Greater London Election on 3 May to challenge the all-party support for the government’s austerity cuts and pay freeze.

The coalition expects to win support from trade unionists and other voters who are angered by the recent statements of Labour leader Ed Miliband and the Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, in which they stated that they will not reverse the Government’s cuts and that they support its pay freeze.

A list of candidates will challenge in the ‘top up’ section of the election and if it wins at least 5% of the vote across the whole of London it could win at least one place on the 25-seat Greater London Assembly.

The coalition has already selected prominent London trade union leaders such as Alex Gordon, the national president of the RMT rail and maritime union and Steve Hedley the RMT’s London Transport regional organiser, Ian Leahair, the Fire Brigades Union executive committee member for the capital, Joe Simpson, assistant secretary of the Prison Officers’ Association and Martin Powell-Davies, who is one of the London representatives on the national committee of the NUT teachers union.

The Labour Party will be concerned that many public sector workers who participated in the 30 November pensions’ strike may be moved to vote for this coalition because of the failure of Labour leaders to support the walk-out.

Labour leaders will also be worried that rank and file union members of Labour affiliated unions could press for their funds to go to a party like TUSC instead of to Labour.

Steve Hedley, whose RMT union was expelled from the Labour Party in 2004 for backing the Scottish Socialist Party, said, “We need candidates who support the ordinary man and woman. TUSC is the only organisation that opposes all cuts, defends pensions and benefits for all working people. Labour just wants a compliant, silent union movement to hand over its money. TUSC will be a voice for all workers and will support trade unions in struggle.”

TUSC national committee member Nick Wrack, who is also a candidate, said, “London is a city of stark contrasts. There is a huge amount of poverty amidst the plenty. Corporate bosses and bankers still get their million pound pay and pension packages while one in six London workers is paid less than the Mayor’s £8.30 per hour living wage. Millions are suffering from the cuts to services and benefits yet last year the city paid out over £4 billion in bonuses. It’s extremely hard even for those on better wages to make ends meet. We believe that there is an opportunity for a party that will speak up for working-class London to make a real break-through and that would begin to change the nature of political debate in Britain today.”

TUSC believes it can get a candidate elected if it wins at least 150,000 votes across London.

NO DEAL - Report from the NUT Executive

NUT seeks urgent talks with other unions to press for further strikes

Dispute at critical stage: let the Executive know you support action

The NUT Executive met for an emergency meeting on January 12 to debate how we respond to the Government’s attempts to bully unions into accepting their ‘Heads of Agreement’ pensions proposals.

We met straight after a TUC meeting of all the main public sector unions where there were reportedly some sharp exchanges between unions still standing firm - like PCS and NUT – and those that had signed a deal that can only mean that their members pay more, retire older and get less.

The discussion needs to be sharp – because the decision of unions like Unison and GMB to sign up to the ‘Heads of Agreement’ doesn’t only threaten support staff and other members of the Local Government Pension Scheme – it threatens the pensions of every one of the two million workers that took such tremendous united action on November 30.

Their retreat means our pensions dispute is now at a critical stage – but the fight is far from finished. Those unions that were bullied into signing – like the ATL - still have to sell their mistaken decision to their members. In schools, the NUT and NASUWT haven’t signed up to the deal, nor have the UCAC, EIS and INTO unions in Wales, Scotland and Ireland. UNITE has strengthened its position since the New Year , rejecting the deal in Health and Local Government. Their private-sector Unliever members will also be taking strike action to defend their pensions in January. Firefighters in the FBU may also join us in action.

Once the facts are known, how can any union accept the ‘heads of agreement’ proposed by the Government? The NUT Executive confirmed unanimously that we cannot agree to a deal that means:

• Normal pension age in the scheme will rise to 68 and even higher.
• Teachers who leave before that age – driven out by excessive workload and the threatened ‘bullies charter’ - will face substantial reductions in their pension entitlements
• Contributions will increase by 50%
• The change to CPI will remove a further 15% of scheme value
• The introduction of career averaging will lead to further cuts in pension value for a big majority of teachers.

Our action had already forced the Government to concede that at least some older teachers can still retire at 60 - although they’ll still be paying in more and getting less in retirement. But all teachers would be hit hard, especially the youngest. If we’re going to reject this unacceptable deal, then we have to carry on our campaign of action to force much more out of this Government.

The Executive agreed that we seek urgent talks with other unions that have not signed up to the heads of agreement to press the case for further action. Mark Serwotka had already told the TUC that morning that the PCS were planning to convene exactly such a joint meeting in the next few days. 

The next two weeks will be critical in constructing a clear action plan. Following those joint talks, the NUT Executive will meet again on January 26 to decide if – and when - we are going to set definite dates for further strike action. 

It’s not a straightforward decision - and it was clear in the debate that doubts, about how many unions will join us and about the resolve of NUT members in schools, were weighing heavily on some Executive members. That’s why in the surveys, school and Association meetings over the next fortnight, it’s vital that NUT members send in motions, letters and emails saying that you support the call for further strike action in defence of our pensions.

In seconding an amendment seeking to strengthen the main motion, I argued that we had to be confident that, once the facts about the deal were spelt out, teachers would understand why we had to reject the deal – and, if so, that we had to continue, and escalate, our action. 

The amendment suggested that NUT took a clear proposal to the joint union action talks to consider a one-day strike before the end of February - and further co-ordinated action in March – before the imposed pension contributions start to further cut teachers’ pay in April. 

I believe that amendment would have helped answer any doubts amongst our members about the Executive’s determination to defend pensions – and sent a firmer message to the Government, and to other unions, that the NUT was ready for a serious fight. 

The amendment was lost by 26 votes to 13 but, significantly, was supported by  Executive members who reported that they were responding to calls from members in their area for the NUT to quickly call further action, including two who wouldn't normally vote with the Executive 'Left'.

Most on the Executive did not want to support a definite timetable at this stage – but we all agreed that the debate will continue on January 26. It’s now vital that NUT members continue to pass on their support for action to give their Executive members the confidence to call the action that must now be taken if we are to defend pensions.

NUT Executive news in brief:
Gove’s ‘Bullies Charter’ - These plans are about bullying and intimidating teachers so that we are too frightened to stand up for ourselves - and for education. The NUT Executive confirmed our opposition to Gove’s plans and to seek to organise action to stop them.
Stop Forced Academies - the campaign to stop one of Gove’s other attacks - bullying schools into becoming Academies - is being fought hard in  Haringey.  Join the demonstration on Saturday 28 January, 12pm at Downhills Primary School, N15.
Sixth Form Colleges ballot - strike ballots to oppose funding cuts and worsening pay and conditions in the sector will be going out to all 6FC members. Votes must be returned by 30 January.


London Assembly Elections: A personal appeal to support trade union candidates
We’re fighting a vicious Government trying to drive through cuts. Yet, with a few honourable exceptions, most opposition politicians aren’t prepared to speak up for trade unionists. That’s why the RMT, FBU and others are planning to stand candidates in the ‘list’ for the Assembly. I have been invited to stand as a prominent NUT member. 
To give support, visit: http://www.tusc.org.uk/pdfs/GLAappealpetition

Lewisham Labour Council supporting Aske's Free School?

A leaflet distributed around Telegraph Hill today confirms the news, as reported in this blog as news broke on Friday, that Haberdashers' Aske's is planning to open a new two-form entry primary Free School in September 2013.

The Federation is clearly pursuing its motto of 'serve and obey' to follow Government policy in favour of using privatised unaccountable Free Schools as a weapon to divide and dismantle Local Authority education. (See http://electmartin1.blogspot.com/2011/09/free-schools-freedom-to-privatise.html for an explanation of what Free Schools really mean.)

Disgracefully, the leaflet claims that the plans have "the support of the Lewisham Local Authority". Is this true? Local councillors (update: but see comment from Paul Bell below), Mayor Bullock and Joan Ruddock MP have some urgent explaining to do - surely they aren't happy to see local education privatised?

Yes, there is a real shortage of primary places - unions have been warning councillors of that for years (but they still decided to close Lewisham Bridge School of course ...) - but turning to Free Schools as an answer is a dangerous acceptance of privatisation - and a slap in the face to staff and governors working so hard at other local schools. 

What will this mean in reality? Aske's will get what they've always wanted - a primary school with a catchment area taking in the leafiest parts of Telegraph Hill. The sibling-preferential admissions will help ensure that they can keep their skewed intake at both primary and secondary-ages. But other local primary schools will suffer as a scramble for places and a widening divide emerges in local education. Education as a whole and, in particular, working-class families and students, will be the losers.

Lewisham NUT has consistently warned that allowing Haberdasher's Aske's to expand its Academy empire could undermine local comprehensive education. But now it is taking the next step of setting up Free Schools as well. If this plan succeeds, it could open the door to even more.

Lewisham NUT calls on everyone who wants to defend education and equalities in the borough to get in touch so we can work together to oppose this dangerous proposal.

Lewisham Council plans threaten teachers and education

Yesterday, Lewisham Council opened a four-week consultation which threatens the future employment of around hundred staff - and also threatens the education of the youngsters they support, youngsters with special needs who will deal particularly badly with change and disruption to their education.

The staff work at Meadowgate and Pendragon Special Schools and in the Communication and Interaction Outreach (CIT) Team based at Kaleidoscope in Catford. They have been told that they will have to go through a competitive interview process to secure future work from September - but will lose their jobs if unsuccessful.

This threat stems from the decision of the Council's Special Needs Review back in 2007 to close Meadowgate and Pendragon Schools and open a new school for students with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD)  - to be called Drumbeat. However, staff always understood that that most of them would transfer employment to the new school. After all, they already have the skills, experience and knowledge of supporting these individual students.

Staff and unions have been asking for years for clarification as to how the transition from Meadowgate and Pendragon schools to Drumbeat would be handled. Now, to our shock and anger, we find at the last minute that the Council is refusing to guarantee continuing employment to staff but plans to put the jobs in the new school out to external advert at the same time as existing staff have to apply for posts. This is a clear threat to staff that they are not wanted in the new school. 

Students will also be disturbed to find that the staff that they have built up a relationship with may no longer be supporting and teaching them in September. In particular, staff and unions are concerned about students at Pendragon School who are presently studying for qualifications as it is unclear how the Council plans to teach these courses from September. Some families may be advised to seek a place in a mainstream school - but it is far from clear where places suitable for these youngsters can be found.

We are particularly concerned to find that, although the new Drumbeat will be catering for similar numbers of students as in the two existing schools, staff numbers are to be cut. The new school is intended to support students with even greater needs yet the Council plans to cut the budget compared to the existing schools. Is this the high-quality education that parents were promised in the Special Needs Review ?

The staff in the CIT have even more reason to be angry. As recently as last year, Council papers were clearly talking about the team '"transferring" to Drumbeat - with no suggestion that they would have to reapply for their posts. Now they face a period of unnecessary insecurity - along with the schools and students that they support.

Lewisham NUT - along with other staff unions - is strongly opposing this threat to teachers and education. There is no justification for treating staff and students in this way. We will be meeting with Council Officers on Friday and demanding that they rethink their plans. If they do not, then we will be mounting a strong campaign to defend staff and students from these plans.