CWU conference overturns executive support for Alan Johnson

[POSTMAN]

SOCIALIST WORKER

The CWU postal and telecom workers’ union today overturned its executive’s recent decision to back Alan Johnson for the deputy leadership of the Labour Party.

Johnson, a former leader of the union, has angered CWU members by support for a share scheme in the Post Office, his failure to support extension of workers' rights, and his anti working class policies.

In a highly charged debate, the tensions of the union's relationship with New Labour, and the hunger for political representation that backs workers’ interests, bubbled to the surface.

And CWU delegates made clear they do not want a divide between the industrial and political policies of the union.

Around 70 percent of delegates backed a motion that said the decision to support Johnson trampled on the instruction from last year’s conference to support only those candidates who were for the Trade Union Freedom Bill, who were for 100 percent public ownership of the Post Office, and who were against Post Office closures.

The motion censured the executive for its decision and told them to reconsider the union’s position and come up with a new recommendation before voting begins for the deputy leader later this week.

Opening the debate, London divisional rep Martin Walsh said, “This is a question of whether our members come first or the Labour Party comes first. Is it the executive or the conference that makes decisions?

“When the union asked the candidates their views on the questions which last year’s conference said were crucial, Alan Johnson’s were the weakest responses.

“If we pass motions and then fail to carry then out, what message does this send to our members?

“We should not support someone who has walked away from this union and its policies.â€

[evilc]

I e-mailed all candidates from the link on this site, at this moment the only reply is from Jon Cruddas stating he opposes privatisation of royal mail and the way service has been opened up to unfair competition, so at the moment he gets my vote.

[jafferpants]

How can anyone take anything alan johnson has to say seriously.he is just like the rest of our so called union leaders from the past who sold thier soul for a seat on the gravy train and i go back as far as tom jackson.When johnson was our so called leader he was going to do miracles for us and then after a bit of palm greasing from the government its up yours lads im off and then all of a sudden we become a bunch of numptys in his eyes.I even wrote to dave ward when he was urging everyone to vote to keep paying the labour party hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money warning him this government would s**t on us but to no avail. I hate to say it but i told you so.As for johnson he is nothing but a two faced hypocrite who would do well to remember where he came from. :

[Big Daz]

At least we have the policy now of 2008 to sort out the regulator or funding stops if the mbrs so wish it to do so.

Last chance saloon now for labour.

Unless those in the labour party who form goverment take notice etc etc then what use is a handfull of labour back bench MP's who agree with us? Re deploy that money into other political activity. As i have said before democracy is needed in the political activties of the union, let the mbrs have a far greater say in were they would like the political levy to go.

I think that take up of political levy would increase if no money was going to labour party, you only have to look at unison who split their levy into two for evidence.

We need to ask ourselves that no matter how much we would like to continue the link, is affilation as effective as we would like it to be.

[Big Daz]

I e-mailed all candidates from the link on this site, at this moment the only reply is from Jon Cruddas stating he opposes privatisation of royal mail and the way service has been opened up to unfair competition, so at the moment he gets my vote.

Same here reply from cruddas and thats it.

Peter Hain has alreday made his views clear on RM competion that its unfair and needs to be sorted out. He has spoken out on this at cabinet meetings as well.

Make him your no 2 on the ballot paper

hilary benn 3rd

harriet 4th

hazel 5th

Al johnson 6th

[norbet colon]

At least we have the policy now of 2008 to sort out the regulator or funding stops if the mbrs so wish it to do so.

Last chance saloon now for labour.

Unless those in the labour party who form goverment take notice etc etc then what use is a handfull of labour back bench MP's who agree with us? Re deploy that money into other political activity. As i have said before democracy is needed in the political activties of the union, let the mbrs have a far greater say in were they would like the political levy to go.

I think that take up of political levy would increase if no money was going to labour party, you only have to look at unison who split their levy into two for evidence.

We need to ask ourselves that no matter how much we would like to continue the link, is affilation as effective as we would like it to be.

The best example is Unison,that TV ad with the two cleaners , one would be "the corporate worker's "representative", that boss wants one out so he can finish the coffee on his desk , there's no way L&C or the papers could try the 70's dinosaurs routine, there?.
The way not to do it is the Bob Crowe /RMT way @ a Conference, straight into the paper's hands.