The north-west regional grouping of United Left has announced that it is not backing any individual candidate to be the next general secretary of the giant Unite union.
The move will be a heavy blow to the London-dominated national UL, which has tried to intimidate regional and national groups into supporting its demand for support for its controversial and heavily disputed decision to back Steve Turner. That decision came after a hustings in which a number of supporters of Howard Beckett were barred from voting that would have been considerably more than enough for Beckett to win the contest had they not been barred, while late joiners who backed Turner were allegedly allowed a vote.
The details of the NWUL decision are:
The London-dominated UL national expelled the entire Scottish ‘PULS’ section for demanding transparency and a proper investigation of the disputed hustings and threatened Welsh members with the same fate if they did not toe the ruling group’s line. The PULS secretary accused the London group of breaching data laws in trying to bypass PULS to poach its members – and a group of Turner supporters apparently acting as a north-west front for UL London was accused of a similar data breach in its campaigning.
The schedule for the election to choose Unite’s next general secretary – one of the key positions in the whole Labour movement – is expected to be announced soon. Unite insiders still believe that disgraced right-winger Gerard Coyne will fail to achieve enough branch nominations to qualify.
The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to without hardship, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
“Unite insiders still believe that disgraced right-winger Gerard Coyne will fail to achieve enough branch nominations to qualify.”
Why are they so desperate to exclude Coyne from the ballot paper?
Where does it say they are ?
Evidence please
That’s the one, Foggy 👍😉.
You know not to hold your breath waiting for the answer; but if everyone else does nothing but demand he explains himself maybe he’ll learn…Maybe.
Foggy – “Where does it say the are”
I haven’t claimed it does. I am simply expressing my opinion. Whether you choose to agree or disagree with my opinion is entirely up to you.
First of all the repeated references in this and other articles to Coyne not getting enough nominations to make it onto the ballot paper give you a clue. When you then start to look into the reasons why it is difficult for him to get sufficient nominations you may also reach the same conclusion that I have on this
After Len McCluskey came within about 5,000 votes of losing in the last Unite GenSec election Len took steps to make it far more difficult for Coyne to ever get on the ballot again and challenge his faction. “running against the union establishment has never been easy, and is even more difficult since a 2019 rule change designed to make it so. A candidate needs nominations from at least 5 per cent – or around 170 – of Unite’s branches instead of just 50 as before.
Turnout in the last general secretary election was only 12.2 per cent. And in the executive elections held this year it was a dismal 7.6 per cent, with over a third of members elected unopposed. Unite should surely hope it will be higher this time. Not only would this strengthen its leadership’s legitimacy but, in a transformed political and economic era, debate about the union’s future has rarely been more vital.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/07/after-mccluskey-who-will-win-unite-s-crown
steveh “Why are they so desperate to exclude Coyne from the ballot paper?”
1 – Because he is “disgraced”. That is polite shorthand for shameful, shocking, scandalous, deplorable, despicable, contemptible, beyond contempt, beyond the pale, dishonourable, discreditable, reprehensible, objectionable, base, mean, low, blameworthy, unworthy, ignoble, shabby, inglorious, infamous, unprincipled, outrageous, abominable, atrocious, appalling, dreadful, terrible, disgusting, shameless, vile, odious, monstrous, heinous, iniquitous, unspeakable, loathsome, sordid, bad, wicked, immoral, nefarious – Take your pick
2 – Because (like Starmer and the enterist right in the Labour Movement generally) he is not a democratic socialist who sees the Union he wants to lead as a bulwark against neopliberal exploitation; in fact, M C seems to think Unite should offer skill enhancement training and very little else.
3 – Because his values are anathema to democratic solcialism and its belief that “the Many” benefit from self-organisation.
Or more to the point, he might win this time.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/keir-starmer-i-may-not-believe-in-god-but-i-do-believe-in-faith/ar-BB1fxaOt
Keith doesn’t believe in God, apparently. Won’t be long before God believes in keith, though.
Failing that, keith will have discovered he IS God**
**Something wee steven’s been telling us heathens for a long time
Toffee: “Keith doesn’t believe in God, apparently. Won’t be long before God believes in keith, though.”
In a bourgeois society nothing other than the mighty market and the even mightier powerful elite is sacred anymore. All values and objects are subject to commodification and satire.
Religious values are not universally respected in “fee” market economies, so democratic socialism is a heroic attempt to preserve notions of human rights, values and ethics (a sense of right and wrong), all of which the alleged leader of Labour’s actions have shown him to disregard and disrespect.
Good for them not falling into line just because the cult of new Labour has decried this is the candidate they shall vote for. These stupid power games demonstrate how these cult members operate and how they have destroyed the old Labour party like a cancer.
We desperately need either a total split but bet these so-called socialists are too scared! Or a new socialist party because this cult of new Labour 2.0 can’t be trusted anymore.