CWU to STOP funding Labour

Rizla · Post by **Rizla** » 25 Jul 2007, 23:40

After today's comments by Gordon Brown, giving OUR hard-earned Â£Â£Â£Â£ to "New Labour" would be just like paying for the bullets to be used by the firing squad in our own execution! Who else thinks that :lfo and :cfo's strings are being pulled by "New Labour" and that they are just "puppets" being used in one sordid, secret agenda? Come on.., look at :lfo & :cfo 's track record so far. They are nothing more than "hired mercenaries...well, aren't they? When they've done their dirty deed, they'll be be gone in cloud of dust with a pile of Â£Â£Â£ in the bank also!

I'd DEFINITELY say NO to giving ANY more of OUR money to "Gordon Brown!

socialist · Post by **socialist** » 26 Jul 2007, 14:45

I reckon it's a bit weird the unions giving money to Labour. If you think about it in business terms, what do the unions get for their money? A kicking. No need to pay them to give us a kicking. But we can't just fight back in the workplace, we need a political party that'll fight for workers against the bosses.

http://www.cnwp.org.uk

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk

IWW Fellow Worker · Post by **IWW Fellow Worker** » 26 Jul 2007, 15:14

While I have a lot of respect for rank and file members of some political parties, I don't want my life controlled by their central commitees any more than I want it controlled by anyone else.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 26 Jul 2007, 15:17

socialist wrote:I reckon it's a bit weird the unions giving money to Labour. If you think about it in business terms, what do the unions get for their money? A kicking. No need to pay them to give us a kicking. But we can't just fight back in the workplace, we need a political party that'll fight for workers against the bosses.

http://www.cnwp.org.uk

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk

Another New Labour "reform in the public sector" & need for flexibility, the usual mixed messages , carrot and stick ,more stick

The Smoking Gnu · Post by **The Smoking Gnu** » 26 Jul 2007, 19:04

socialist wrote:I reckon it's a bit weird the unions giving money to Labour. If you think about it in business terms, what do the unions get for their money? A kicking. No need to pay them to give us a kicking. But we can't just fight back in the workplace, we need a political party that'll fight for workers against the bosses.

http://www.cnwp.org.uk

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk

As long as it's not just Militant in disguise. We need an inclusive party not a talking shop for intellectual Trots.

socialist · Post by **socialist** » 26 Jul 2007, 20:23

The Smoking Gnu wrote:
socialist wrote:I reckon it's a bit weird the unions giving money to Labour. If you think about it in business terms, what do the unions get for their money? A kicking. No need to pay them to give us a kicking. But we can't just fight back in the workplace, we need a political party that'll fight for workers against the bosses.

http://www.cnwp.org.uk

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk
As long as it's not just Militant in disguise. We need an inclusive party not a talking shop for intellectual Trots.

You're right, we do need an inclusive party, not a talking shop for intellectual Trots! The Socialist Party is not in a position to build that on its own. Even if every socialist grouping outside Labour merged, it wouldn't amount to much really.

However, the trade unions (despite declining membership) still account for over 6 million members in Britain. Bob Crow from the RMT has recently said the RMT would be looking to register to stand candidates in the London Assembly elections next year. Other trade unions could do the same, and they'd be a lot better represented than they are now!

The purpose of the Campaign for a New Workers' Party is simply that, a campaign to popularise the idea for a new workers' party. If a new workers party is brought about and it doesn't go through the structures of the CNWP, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. I'd argue for the CNWP to be dissolved and for people active within it to join such a new party.

Big Daz · Post by **Big Daz** » 26 Jul 2007, 20:57

The green party is what you are describing and looking for!

May i suggest you read Bob Crows speech!!!!

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/speeches/45

socialist · Post by **socialist** » 26 Jul 2007, 23:37

Big Daz wrote:The green party is what you are describing and looking for!

May i suggest you read Bob Crows speech!!!!

http://www.greenparty.org.uk/speeches/45

I've got a lot of time for Green Party members, some of whom are good activists. It's an important development that left-wingers Sian Berry and Derek Wall have been elected as Green Party principal speakers. However, whilst this is happening nationally, in a number of local areas, Green Party councillors have supported privatisation and cuts. This is a concern, because it seems that the national party has no means of holding these elected representatives to account due to the decentralised structure of the party. Furthermore, internationally, green parties have been prepared to join right-wing governments, in Germany and Ireland for instance, when their representatives hold the balance of power. This is mirrored in some local councils in Britain.

Bob Crow's speech which you refer to is dated from 2004. I think his political stance has moved somewhat since then. At the inaugural conference of the Shop Stewards Network, an initiative set up by the RMT, he said that they would be standing independent candidates in the GLA elections. If this is accurate, will the Green Party in London stand against RMT candidates, or seek some form of alliance? As I said, the Socialist Party is not strong enough to declare a new workers' party on its own. We think a new workers' party should be federal, broad, and inclusive, with a programme against cuts, closures, privatisation and war. However, would the Greens be willing to join such a formation if one was set up? I think we have to wait for events, but such a development could lead to a split in the Greens between some of the more career-orientated local councillors, and good left-wing activists.

IWW Fellow Worker · Post by **IWW Fellow Worker** » 27 Jul 2007, 16:06

Would I vote for a new workers party? I doubt it. The history of Socialist Alliance seemed to show that the party with the largest membership will take over and run it their way, abandoning it when something else comes along. I don't want to contribute to a sectrarian dispute between the parties who formerly made up the Socialist Alliance, or indeed those who remain in it, but what is to stop the largest party doing so again? It appears to be happening with Respect if the pages of the Weekly Worker are anything to go by. The left seem able to work together on things like fighting racism, supporting workers struggles (such as the one we're all involved in right now) and the war, but when it comes to electoral pacts, there seem to be too many people at the top of the respective parties taking up entrenched positions for any progress to be made. I have to say I'm just an interested observer who has been around since the old Anti-Fascist Commitees in the mid 70s but who increasingly sees the electoral road to socialism as having nothing to offer. No disrespect to those comrades among the rank and file of left-wing parties, but I've got enough on my plate being told what to do by living British dictators without throwing in a couple of dead Germans and Russians as well.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 27 Jul 2007, 17:02

IWW Fellow Worker wrote:Would I vote for a new workers party? I doubt it. The history of Socialist Alliance seemed to show that the party with the largest membership will take over and run it their way, abandoning it when something else comes along. I don't want to contribute to a sectrarian dispute between the parties who formerly made up the Socialist Alliance, or indeed those who remain in it, but what is to stop the largest party doing so again? It appears to be happening with Respect if the pages of the Weekly Worker are anything to go by. The left seem able to work together on things like fighting racism, supporting workers struggles (such as the one we're all involved in right now) and the war, but when it comes to electoral pacts, there seem to be too many people at the top of the respective parties taking up entrenched positions for any progress to be made. I have to say I'm just an interested observer who has been around since the old Anti-Fascist Commitees in the mid 70s but who increasingly sees the electoral road to socialism as having nothing to offer. No disrespect to those comrades among the rank and file of left-wing parties, but I've got enough on my plate being told what to do by living British dictators without throwing in a couple of dead Germans and Russians as well.

The parties that honour dead germans & russians tend to be splitters, be it far left or right like the real ira, continuity IRA etc , there's no way I'd vote for anything to do with Scargill or Galloway .The laughable thing is they align themselves with the religious far right & are anti-semetic.

IWW Fellow Worker · Post by **IWW Fellow Worker** » 27 Jul 2007, 17:12

Having watched that documentary on Channel 4, I do believe some on the left could do with choosing their friends with a little more care when it comes to condemning the treatment of the Palestinians.

springheeled boris · Post by **springheeled boris** » 28 Jul 2007, 00:05

norbet colon wrote: The parties that honour dead germans & russians tend to be splitters, be it far left or right like the real ira, continuity IRA etc , there's no way I'd vote for anything to do with Scargill or Galloway .The laughable thing is they align themselves with the religious far right & are anti-semetic.

what like george orwell- the police spy, homophobe, lier, communist hater and new labourite?
i am worried about your anti catholic irish partisans fighting for their own land stolen from them by cromwell, occupied ireland, occupied palestine- the alarm bell are ringing.

norbet colon · Post by **norbet colon** » 28 Jul 2007, 10:05

springheeled boris wrote:
norbet colon wrote: The parties that honour dead germans & russians tend to be splitters, be it far left or right like the real ira, continuity IRA etc , there's no way I'd vote for anything to do with Scargill or Galloway .The laughable thing is they align themselves with the religious far right & are anti-semetic.
what like george orwell- the police spy, homophobe, lier, communist hater and new labourite?
i am worried about your anti catholic irish partisans fighting for their own land stolen from them by cromwell, occupied ireland, occupied palestine- the alarm bell are ringing.

Just don't think much of the far left and right parties as to how they operate

blackadder · Post by **blackadder** » 28 Jul 2007, 15:30

i have said in other sites here why is our union funding the labour party, when the labour party couldnt care bout us. thank f**k i aint the only 1 here 2 see the damage we doing to ourselves.