Of course, Turkish ancestry wasn’t enough to protect Boris from accusations of racism.

And we must remember that racism is not necessarily an intentional act and that any act “which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person” is, in fact, racist, as defined by the Macpherson report. So at least according to the official logic of racism, I don’t see how these left wing activists have any leg to stand on. Any perception of racism is equivalent to it.

I imagine most principled opponents of New Labour (left or right) are undeserving of this sort of treatment. But at the same time I cannot help but note the irony of this relativised and insinuated attitude towards race blowing up in the faces of some leftwing activists.

Hi Nick,

Yep, that’s certainly been a point for debate, and there are those who thought that pamphlet was ill advised. I’ve linked to a post on Jon Rogers’ blog on that theme in the above article. I’ve been at meetings where black union members have said they didn’t care for the pamphlet, and I’ve been at meetings where black union members have said they resent Unison playing the race card in an attempt to nail these activists. I am not black and alas, unlike Boris, can’t pretend that the Belgraves ever have been. I have an opinion, though, whether or not I am entitled to it. I think these activists are being targeted.

Few points, though – the union investigation into the allegations found no racist intent. The union also dropped its investigation into the fifth activist – Matthew Waterfall – who was not a socialist party member, although he did produce the pamphlet. It expelled Yunus Bakhsh, a high profile black member and branch secretary who felt that the complaints that led to his dismissal from both his job and from Unison may have been racially motivated – and it transpired that Bakhsh’s concerns may not have been too wide of the mark:

http://johnmcdsunionblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/support-yunus-bakhsh.html

Perhaps these socialist party members quietly harbour racist views – or perhaps there was no connection in their minds between the cartoon and the chair of the standing orders committee. Perhaps the fact that they were insensitive to the possibility that others would make a connection between the cartoon and the chair of the standing orders committee meant they quietly harboured racist views. You’re right to say that it’s blown up in their faces, though. It’s blown up in everyone’s faces. These activists have done a great deal of work for a great many people who otherwise would never have had workplace representation. Now, everybody loses – including the Labour party, I would have thought.

“We on the left are not pleased.”

Please don’t say that as if you are representative. “The left” is a large ideological house, and not everybody inhabits your particular cloakroom.

Kentron – are you saying that there are people out there who don’t think the same as I do on absolutely everything…?

Shurely shome mistake…

nd we must remember that racism is not necessarily an intentional act and that any act “which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person” is, in fact, racist, as defined by the Macpherson report.

There is racism and there is invented racism and crying wolf. This looks like a case of the latter.

There is no such distinction. If someone believes a racist act has taken place, then a racist act has taken place. At least according to police guidelines. It is a severe incursion on the notion of the rule of law and offers a large space for abuse, as is apparently taking place here.

So are Unison alleging that by using the picture of the three monkeys to criticise a panel the creators of the pamphlet were racially abusing the chair because he is Black?

The three wise monkeys have their origins at least as far back as 17th century Japan and may even come from all the way back in the 8th century if wikipedia is to be believed.

If we are talking purely in terms of race (which we may not be of course, given the case made above) it seems that the use of any cartoon or metaphor involving monkeys anywhere along the line can be called racist if one of its targets is a Black person. Now I’d actually agree in most cases, but given the extensive history and complete lack of racial suggestion in the metaphor of the three wise monkeys it is ridiculous.

We can either fight racism (and apologise if we inadvertently cause offence and discuss the problem, as the five activists may not have done sufficiently) or we can let it oppress us forever by ceding to the racists any bit of imagery or language that has ever been used by them.

Or you might even say that, in general, accusations of offence are irrelevant to the substantive issues being discussed and that attacking people as racist is usually a distraction, sometimes (as in this case) strategically deployed.

in general, accusations of offence are irrelevant to the substantive issues

Sometimes. But racism does exist, including in our national media. It’s just being used as a ploy here, despicably.

I’m not sure that accusations of a ‘witchhunt’ are more than a rallying call designed to agitate and provoke a split. Because of the sensitivity of the issue, mentions of race are incendiary and obviously one of the easiest means of driving a wedge through the current organisation, and I think it’s legitimate to ask whether this row is valid or whether it is an artificial ploy inflated for effect. Couldn’t it be said that it’s reflective of a deeper split drawn into focus because of Labour’s failure in government?

Here in my neck of the woods unions aren’t being purged, but actively courted by the Liberty & Solidarity Party, who recently announced their aim of “linking up with all local trade unionists, as well as community and other working-class action groups” with the creation of a new shop stewards network. RMT, Unison, CWU, Unite and IWW were all represented.

Their local members seem to have some historical connections with the Greens, but they have yet to fully break cover and stand in elections. So, can anybody tell me more about the L&S group, what their intentions are and how widespread their reach is?

I think it would be an interesting development to see a new and more organised force on the far left on the spectrum. The Conservatives have benefitted from greater clarity of purpose since Ukip and the BNP started visibly drawing away some of their more extreme right-wing support, so maybe it could be a good thing for Labour in the medium-term.

You have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.

Only in the world of public-sector union madness – a world which has been at the forefront of cultivating the idea that someone else’s taking of offence irrespective of the cause is grounds for serious action – could the image of the three wise monkeys be considered racist.

Hoist by own petard springs to mind.

Well, all – I think the problems activists have with Unison depend to an extent on the number of Trots in yr branch. Certainly, London branches are having a rotten time of it. Regional officers have been insinuated in branches like Hammersmith and Fulham, Barnet, Newham, and Yunus Bakhsh’s branch, and god knows where else – I’ll google up a list when I’ve got a moment this evening, but feel free to do so yourselves in the interim.

Complaints abound of regional interference in branch negotiations, etc, etc – the whole thing is out of hand. I also understand from a number of sources that some interesting questions will be asked of Unison officials at tribunal this week re: whether they are actively organising to expel Trots. There have been a number of incidents of concern in recent times, and members have complained.

As for the political opportunism of the four I’ve written above in the original post – well, they certainly are political, and certainly have a line to push, but nothing in my conversations with them over the past couple of years has ever suggested that they’ve welcomed or enjoyed the opportunties presented by accusations of racism. Let’s be sensible about this. Who the hell wants that? I don’t think they’ve much enjoyed the uncertainty that a two year investigation has presented, either. Muna’s employers took the opportunity to raise a disciplinary against her over another matter – they knew she no longer had union backing, and welcomed the chance to kick her when she was down. Let’s not forget that these activists have given years to representing and speaking up for low paid workers, and their own union has decided that ain’t worth a knobble of goatshit. Better to silence Labour critics than to make sure that the average worker has support and representation if it’s needed.

it’s not every day union members take their own union to tribunal.

I’ve done the same, with UNISON, as it happens.

Have you? What happened?

I won’t comment on the actual evidence against the individuals named since I believe there is an internal appeal pending but the sectarian nonsense spouted off about UNISON is just (IMO) a load of utter twaddle and people should be ashamed of posting such ignorant bile, rubbish and nonsense about a great and fair democratic union.

John,

You break my heart.

How’s things at Labour link?

a load of utter twaddle and people should be ashamed of posting such ignorant bile, rubbish and nonsense about a great and fair democratic union.

Hi John – I’m sorry but I don’t buy this. If the union is doing something stupid then it should be pointed out. Just saying it’s a great union and therefore we shouldn’t say anything sounds like an attempt to shut the debate down.

Sorry about that Kate – honest!

but you will be really pleased to hear that Labour Link is really hot at the moment -plenty of great ideas about building the Labour movement family.

How’s things with the Forgotten brigade?

Great stuff, John. Have you found a phone booth to hold your first meeting in?

One question for you – what are youse going to do when there’s no Labour left to link to after the next election?

Hi Sunny
The union (which I don’t claim to speak for) cannot defend itself over this since internal discipline appeals are pending. I won’t comment about the allegations themselves (I have a view) but the utterly vile lies and anti-union propaganda put out by their supporters is in my opinion (for what it is worth) absolutely disgraceful.

The union is more important than anyone of us. It’s not some debating society. Anyone who publically attacks the union makes the life of front line union’s reps even more difficult. I was brought to believe that Trade union rule number one is – You do not attack your own union. You do not mess on your own doorstep. Full stop.

Hi Kate
We win elections (mostly) – you lot don’t win any and never will.
I still think that Labour will still win the next election. “It’s the economy stupid” – and the Tories have chosen to back the wrong economic arguments. If however, (God forbid) we don’t – the reality of Tory rule will soon have everyone running to Labour again saying “we didn’t realise it would be this bad how can we support you”.
BTW – Have you booked your ticket yet?

Well, John – the union will have to defend itself publicly this week because it’s answering a case at an employment tribunal which has an open gallery. I understand certain people will be asked if they’re actively targeting lefties. Me – I’ll be all ears.

Dumping on the doorstep is better than dumping on the membership, too – how do you explain Yunus Bakhsh and Tony Staunton’s expulsions? Why didn’t Unison just sort this thing with the socialist party members out? Why pursue disciplinary action and office bans for four branch officers who really have been outstanding for their members for so many years? Banning them from office will weaken their branches terribly. You know that.

People feel the Right is destroying Unison, John – you can’t keep that kind of feeling or news behind closed doors. They feel the Labour link has been ineffective, that the Warwick agreement wasn’t worth the paper it was written on – they feel betrayed.

Better to engage in open debate about all of this. Unison ain’t so good at open debate though, is it? Members have been begging for open debate behind the closed doors of conference for some years now, only to have their motions dismissed.

You attack your own union if it attacks you.

John – Labour will not win the next election while Gordon is there, decaying at the helm. I agree that people will run from the Tories, but they’ll run off a cliff before they run towards Labour unless it reforms.

“The union is more important than anyone of us. It’s not some debating society. Anyone who publically attacks the union makes the life of front line union’s reps even more difficult. I was brought to believe that Trade union rule number one is – You do not attack your own union. You do not mess on your own doorstep. Full stop.”

Wow. That’s one of the most unhealthy ways to treat an institution that I’ve ever heard.

Well Kentron – John’s kind of a Unison/Labour party man. There aren’t many of them left and the ones that are are, um, real stayers.

I, too, won’t comment on the case of this great, fair and pretty union.

(Sorry – I have no resistance to the infectious propensities of snark.)

C’mon, John, how can an institution retain internal accountability without self-criticism? Even Kate’s most venemous swipe – “the New Labour-loving horrors” – is an attack on the leadership and direction, rather than the union as a whole (members, traditional principles etc.).

Thank you, BenSix. You understand the subtleties perfectly.

I think John does as well. John?

John Gray

You do not attack your own union. You do not mess on your own doorstep. Full stop.

That’s bollocks John and you know it.

The four Socialist Party members have been treated appallingly by Unison, treated appallingly on no other grounds than their Socialist party membership and by the fact that they’ve consistently stuck by their principles and refused to toe the Unison NuLab/Labour Link party line.

I don’t know about you, but I happen to think that vigorous debate about issues is a good thing in a trade union, and that activists like these four are what makes Unison such an invigorating trade union to be involved in. I don’t agree with their line on everything, but by god they make conference a much more interesting place than the Labour Party conference replica you and yours appear to want to make it.

I’ve been keeping schtum on this one up to now, ‘cos I’m not sure if me mouthing off is likely to hurt or hinder their case, but I have to say that for the first time in 10 years I’ve seriously considered chucking in my Unison membership over this travesty.

Hi folks

Its getting late so I will hold my tougue, but in my view it is wrong, wrong, wrong to attack your union that you haven choosen to belong to – because you don’t agree with the outcome of an internal discipline complaint?

Being a front line union rep is so bloody difficult – I do dispair of those who think their ego is more important than their own union.

Being a front line union rep is so bloody difficult – I do dispair of those who think their ego is more important than their own union.

Well, I think there are issues here of loyalty, discipline and internal debate. I don’t agree with the idea that you should shut down internal debate.

However, I also don’t have much sympathy for SWPers who are just about agitating for the next revolution. The problem for me is the disgraceful way these people are being turfed out. It gives a green light to people to say that actual racism is also the stuff of political correctness.

PS – You’re a loyal man but the Labour party is heading for a massive defeat. And unless the unions start doing some introspection now the Tories will be in power for a long time.

‘Being a front line union rep is so bloody difficult – I do dispair of those who think their ego is more important than their own union.’

And nothing makes being a front line union rep more difficult than being expelled from one’s own union.

Come on, John. The destroyers here aren’t the front line reps who also happen to be socialist party members. The destroyers are the unelected union officials who won’t tolerate opposition to the Labour party.

Hi Sunny
I’m sorry but you don’t know the full facts – people are telling (in my view) blatant untruths about what has happened. There is a different between internal debate and outright assault. We now even have the tribunal saga to try and declare SPEW as a cult which if successful (I’ll be astonished if it is) would make it impossible to expel racists or BNP activists from any union. Smart move folks!

Aside – Yes, the Labour Party is in a difficult position but I still think we will win next year since “it’s the economy stupid” will be key and the Tories are still barking up the wrong economic tree. There is a crucial role for the unions in the lead up to the elections to make the Party more electable and I hope that they will play their part.

Hi Kate – as you of all people know very well the UNISON discipline process while probably not perfect is extremely fair and overseen by democratically elected lay members.

This case has nothing, repeat nothing to do with support of the Labour Party – Let us say purely for argument sake that SPEW is a bloody nuisance to unions whose activists do stupid things from time to time which needs to be dealt with under union rules (and of course now try to undermine us in front of our employers) – it is however electorally absolutely insignificant and politically completely powerless. The flea on an elephant.

The Labour Party itself could not give a damn about them.

Oh come on, John. Let’s have an adult dialogue about this. How can you claim that that union is open to dialogue? Something like 50% of submitted motions were struck from last year’s conference agenda and I gather the number this year was even worse. Branches are being taken over by regional officers and branch secretaries are feeling threatened and undermined by that. They’re not all Trots, either. And Unison has dismissed effective and admired activists like Bakhsh and Staunton, and pursued them in civil cases after their dismissals (Staunton certainly). It’s dreadful.

There’s no point just stating that the union is fair and that anyone who can’t see that simply needs to learn to be grateful. You need to provide examples of that fairness, and/or (preferably and), address some of the points various commentators have raised. You’re in a good position to do that, and there are plenty of people who’d like to hear what you have to say. I’m one of them. Write a blog on the topic. You’re close to Unison and you’re a Labour link officer. Tell us what the link is up to. Tell us how the link will work when the Tories get in. Tell us if any of the Warwick agreement points are going to be pursued. Don’t just write angry members and commentators off as nutty pinkos. It makes you look like a lightweight, and I don’t think you are.

Sorry Kate – you are wrong yet again – I am a “lightweight” Check out http://grayee.blogspot.com/2009/08/spew-ist-das-opium-des-volkes.html

LOL – so you are!

Ok, now that’s funny

It is, alas – I’ve had to give John a few points for that. LOL

John, you seem to think ‘loyalty’ should be to the leadership rather than to members, which might have been the way things were run in the Soviet Union but it has no place in a democracy.

Frankly, if the allegations of ‘racism’ prove false – which I suspect they will – those responsible should be booted out of the union movement as a whole.

I’m a union rep and I’m in favour of severing the link with Labour. Nobody I represent wants that link maintained either. If the union leadership doesn’t like that, tough shit: they didn’t elect me.

A union is responsible to it’s members; otherwise it’s just shadow management.

Spot on there, Shatterface. Thing is – the allegations of racism HAVE already been proven false – the union found no racist intent during its investigation. That’s why this ultimate finding of causing racist offence was incongruous. I understand the allegations altered a bit through the investigation as well – things like misusing photocopiers, etc, went in and out of scope and all the rest of it. The phrase ‘making it up as you go along’ comes to mind