APPROACHES

Most of the major trade unions in Scotland have adopted a positive and sensible approach to the referendum, as have the STUC. This year’s Congress was a real debate conducted in the best spirit of trade union principles – and contrasts significantly with the chaotic contribution of the  Confederation of British Industry. I accept the right of some individual trade unions and the STUC to adopt a position of challenging both sides , whilst welcoming those unions and branches that support a Yes vote.

However todays Communication Workers Union UK Conference decision is disappointing as they have gone down the same cul de sac as the GMB in that their leadership have imposed a line without consultation in exactly the same way as the CBI did – to support a No vote without consulting any of their members.

 The consequences for those trade unions are yet to be seen, but I have heard that individual members are unhappy about a basic tenet of democracy being ignored, and would have wanted to be consulted on this most important of issues – the future direction of our country and the role their trade union intends to take in the campaign. It’s their subscriptions from their hard earned wages which underwrites any campaigning and the leadership “we know best” approach is hardly a 21^st century approach to politics.

So it proved for the CBI - registering of CBI for the No campaign without the basic requisite of consulting its own members was only going to have one effect.  Resignations.  Another part of this however, begs the question as to why so many public bodies were members in the first place.

At the STUC Congress, correctly, the decision was taken to challenge both sides.  This was a genuine engagement, and any trade union who has engaged with their members properly will tell you, that whilst they may have an individual view, they wish the trade union to challenge both sides – exactly the course taken by PCS.

These recent events leave the decision taken by the Communication Workers Union , all the more baffling.  Already on social media, CWU members are signalling their resignations, in what was described only a few weeks ago by the Sunday Herald as a “sham consultation”.  Whilst I would never encourage any member to resign, the feeling of being ignored and not consulted is an anti-democratic practice, which, given the importance of the decision is indefensible.

 The approaches all organisations take in this debate, have consequences no matter the result.  Organisations which have taken a view without consultation may very well find after the 18^th September that they are left behind in determining the next steps on Scotland’s future, due to mistrust, and a feeling that they do not represent the interests of those they claim to.  This calls for open, transparent, and democratic processes – for the sake of their members who deserve better. After all – who would have ever imagined that the CBI and some trade unions would have something in common ?

 

 

 

A Wee bit more Devo

Sometimes it’s actually possible to feel very sorry for Scottish Labour Party leaders – tonight it was Johann Lamont’s turn to try and defend the indefensible. The position of the Labour party in Scotland has, since the mid-seventies, been reminiscent of Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow.  A long bloody struggle to hold a line and eventually retreating in disarray, scattering baggage along the way.  There are those who question the impartiality of the BBC in the independence debate, but Gordon Brewer’s forensic, detailed questioning of Lamont on Newsnight Scotland tonight exposed the fundamental contradictions at the heart of Scottish Labour.

With a few honourable exceptions, the Labour party in Scotland has regarded devolution and the granting of more powers to Scotland as a war of attrition – concessions reluctantly made in the face of nationalist advance, but designed to halt any progress towards full independence, rather than a positive choice to empower and let go of Westminster control.

Every advance towards self-determination for Scotland has been made reluctantly – yes, devolution was enacted by New Labour, but only after a second vote (as if the 1997 Labour manifesto wasn’t really serious) and explicitly promoted as a way to “kill nationalism stone dead”.

From the Hamilton by-election onwards, Scottish Labour has been profoundly disturbed by the notion that anyone other than themselves can represent the Scottish people. Their sense of outrage has only increased over the years, leading to the dismal tribal tenor of what passes for their debate in the run-up to the referendum.

What was exposed tonight was the total incoherence of the Scottish Labour position – do we really think that a further set of “a wee bit more “ devo proposals would have been forthcoming if it wasn’t for the re-election of the SNP government (with a majority) and a pending referendum on independence ? The inability of Lamont to answer whether Labour in Scotland could set higher tax rates without reference to a Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer cruelly exposed the fundamental misunderstanding of what real powers for a purpose should look like.  That’s if Labour win the 2015 election – that’s the X-Factor we all are being invited to take a gamble on. Trust us – we did such a great job of addressing inequality the last time around.

What was announced today was the proverbial mish mash of try and please everyone (within the Scottish Labour tribal tent) and end up pleasing no-one. Incoherent, full of inbuilt contradictions (employment law reserved but employment tribunals devolved) , with a vague attempt to present as socially progressive and fiscally redistributive but taking fright at actually stating that a future Scottish Labour administration would really be coming for the wealthy – and in many ways, that’s Johann’s tragedy. She probably does want to be more open about that, but can’t say so as theUK leadership dominated by the Blairite Progress group won’t let her.

Not so much wee things, just a wee bit more.

REPORT FROM CARDIFF

Last weekend I visited the Plaid Cymru Spring Conference, along with SNP Trade Union colleague Ross Cassie (pictured), and it was probably just as well we weren’t there this Saturday after that rugby score. However, am happy to report that despite giving Scotland one of our worst defeats ever, our Celtic Comrades are strongly supporting us in our joint campaign for self-determination!

This was my second visit to a Plaid event having visited Wales six months before the 2007 election, and perhaps it is a good omen that I was down six months before the referendum.

There is always some curiosity between Plaid and SNP members as to why our electoral performances are so markedly different just now.  It was during this recent visit that I began to really appreciate the scale of the task facing our Celtic Comrades.  Just prior to the conference an opinion poll showed that their one European seat is under threat in May, and astonishingly UKIP already have an MEP for Wales.

The stark reality of the struggle hit home when I was addressing the UNDEB (Plaid Cymru’s Trade Union section).   Whilst the majority of Trade Unions in Scotland are fairly neutral towards independence, and many individual members are voting Yes, the feeling in Wales is that TU’s are still firmly embedded in the Labour Party machine. It was a well-attended meeting and I do know that there are many Plaid activists who are trade union members, but who feel that their voices are yet to be listened to by their union leaderships.  I encouraged our Plaid colleagues to keep on arguing the case for alternatives to the Labour status quo, and promote a positive vision as to why their political party – with democratic socialist values- is best placed to represent them in parliament and local government.  For many workers, and public sector workers in particular, pay, terms and conditions are decided in an England and Wales context, which also makes the case for strong local representation. The sense of frustration at the extent of Labour led authorities in Wales implementing Coalition Cuts without much of an attempt to alleviate or fight back was very clear,  It begs the question that although there are cuts that Labour in Scotland are implementing in the councils they run, and a continued squeeze on terms and conditions for our members – how much worse would it be if Holyrood was Labour led as well ?

Another major challenge, which was brought home to me in our discussions, was the in media.  In many parts of Wales, newspapers and other media are London focused, with no Welsh editions of newspapers, and our colleagues were very upfront that the only media coverage about Scotland’s referendum is through Westminster based media eyes.  We should appreciate that despite the many challenges the newspaper industry face, that regardless of their views on Independence, we have a major advantage in a Scottish based newspaper industry and media, that covers political stories from a Scottish angle. Not to mention the journalists and commentators who report without party bias or favour.

We spent many enjoyable hours in the company of the great Welsh Historian Dr John Davies, who remarked that he was quite offended when listening to the radio where it was suggested that should Scotland vote YES, then all that would be left of the UK is England and its “bits” …….John didn’t take too kindly that Wales was regarded as “a bit”. Having written the definitive history and encyclopaedia of Wales, that’s understandable – and I was intrigued to discover that the copies of his works that are held in the Mitchell library are from the late Edwin Morgan’s  collection – both writers of international renown.

Another curious factor, was that the coalition with Labour from 2007 to 2011 may have electorally damaged Plaid in the short term.  Many Plaid activists feel that in that coalition, Plaid taught Labour how to be Welsh, and to drape themselves in the Welsh flag. 

What is clear is that Plaid are supporting Scottish independence, and that a YES vote would be a boost for more powers for Wales.  Plaid Cymru are playing, (correctly in my view) a long game.  This undermines the solidarity against self-determination argument put out by No supporters who keep insisting that a YES vote would be a disaster for other parts of the UK. That argument would have more force if there weren’t alternative voices in both Wales (and England) saying that Yes in Scotland gives an opportunity for an alternative vision for the rest of the UK.  

I really enjoyed the weekend, and strongly believe that there are positive actions for Plaid Cymru to take forward, particularly their trade union section.   A  strong values based campaign saw them handsomely retain the Ynys Mon by-election, the party has a clear democratic socialist vision for Wales, with a popular leader in Leanne Wood and they should take Scotland’s advances as a clarion call for more powers leading to independence. We should be very clear that the Yes campaign has resonance and meaning beyond Scotland’s borders and people are looking to us to provide hope and example. I lost count of the number of times Plaid activists told me to let everyone in Scotland know how important it for Wales that Scotland votes Yes !

So with that – I also look forward to welcoming Plaid activists who fancy a busman’s holiday in Scotland in September…!

 

KNOW YOUR PLACE

“My hunch is that poking Scotland in the chest while telling it what it can't do won't help the No's”

Billy Bragg – 12^th February 2014

Considering that’s the view of a passionate, patriotic (in the finest sense of the word) Englishman, it makes you wonder what the reaction among voters in Scotland to George Osborne’s scolding lecture will be in the weeks and months ahead.

The First Minister’s response this week was measured and positive – and although many Scottish voters would be tempted to respond “Aye do you think…” to the “No you can’t” diktat from the unionist parties, he opted for the “Yes, we can” message.

Let’s consider Osborne’s track record as Chancellor and credibility. He promised that the UK would keep its AAA credit rating – failed.  Reduce the deficit? – failed.  We are meant to believe that Mr Osborne is omniscient in economic matters, especially when it comes to the issue of a currency union – and of course, he is guided by the most impartial advice the civil service can provide. A view provided by the mandarins will inevitably incline towards caution, as change is always suspect and the status quo is the default preference at all times.  Was the UK Chancellor correct on this occasion? Let’s consider the report from Professor Christine Bell of Edinburgh University.

“Legally under international law the position is clear: if the remainder UK keeps the name and status of the UK under international law, it keeps its liabilities for the debt.  The UK took out the debt, and legally it owes the money.  Scotland cannot therefore ‘default’.   It can be argued that international law does, however, contemplate that on dividing, the two resulting states.”

Some economists have been making dire predictions that Scotland ‘defaulting on the debt’ is irresponsible – and ignoring the  actual response from the Yes campaign which is to set out a reasonable negotiating point – that if assets aren’t to be shared, then why should liabilities?  Why is a Scottish government not allowed to its negotiate in the event of a “Yes” vote ? That, in effect is the position of the 3 main unionist parties – to deny the right of elected representatives to secure the best deal for Scotland in the event of a “Yes” vote – a blatant denial of the democratic right of the Scottish people to determine their own future. “

Just consider what has actually happened last week –  the Tories, Labour and Lib-Dems position as articulated last week is to state clearly and unequivocally that there will be no reasonable negotiations around our joint economic interests  in an attempt to bludgeon voters into voting “No”.

In a nutshell, the Better Together message boils down to – there’s no point in voting “Yes” because it’s not going to work ( because we say so) and there’s no possibility of an alternative future. There’s no such thing as political will, there’s no point in expecting your elected representatives to articulate and fight for the possibility of change and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with the political and economic systems in one of the most unequal countries in the western world. The fact that those who are articulating the “no change” message have a personal stake in business as usual as the system has worked very well for them (Westminster MP’s) gives them not a moment’s pause.

I watched the first in the “Scandimania” documentaries last night, where Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall travelled around Norway and expect he’ll be accused of pandering to the “Yes” campaign by showing a small successful country that’s made good use of natural and human resources to support a society that looks fairly decent – not perfect, but sustainable. One of the more depressing aspects of the nay-sayers is the petty sneering at our Scandanavian neighbours whenever the prospect of a different society in Scotland is discussed.

I fully expected the big red panic button to be pressed in the run up to September 18^th, but am curious as to why now – presumably to halt any sense of momentum in the “yes” campaign, but all this has done is give people time to discuss and consider why there is No Future. The conventional wisdom is that negative always beats positive and that fear always beats hope – that’s tired old politics and my next post will be on how that’s the politics of self-destruction for the unionist parties in Scotland who may find they are destroying their own hopes in order to Save the Union. It’s still in the balance for the referendum, but voters will wonder why in future elections should they vote for parties that are insulting their democratic right to express an opinion, and insulting their intelligence at the same time.

 

 

A Just Scotland

I’ve been meaning to blog for a good while now on the issue of what makes a Just Scotland, as well as reflecting on the journey many people in Scotland have made and are making from the Labour Movement towards supporting Independence. This was very much on my mind recently - as many of you will know, our Convener of Govan SNP, Steve Butler, sadly passed away in December after a very short illness.

Steve was the Constituency Officer Manager for Jim Sillars, and so when I joined the SNP on the back of the 1988 Govan By-election and the Anti-Poll Tax campaign I got to meet him for the first time. I was aware of his background in the trade union movement and am proud to say he was my mentor and someone whose values I shared.

Steve became a good friend and colleague and his contribution, and kindness to many people will never be forgotten.  A typical story about him comes from when he was covering the polling station in Priesthill in 2011.  A conversation with the local Minister resulted in him helping to repair the church organ. He believed in action and his many small acts of assistance were as big a contribution to his community as a lifetime of political debate and activism.

For the wider political picture  I would recommend an interview with a young Steve Butler from 1975 -  with an equally young Christopher Hitchens for the New Statesman, which sums up a lot of Steve’s political thoughts …………..” Steve Butler, a young shop steward from Rolls- Royce in East Kilbride, told me why he had left the Labour Party in Glasgow and signed up with the Nationalists (for whom he hopes to become industrial organiser). ‘Self-government would be a step towards socialism,’ he said. ‘I used to identify with people like Foot but since they took office I’ve given them up.”

Anne McLaughlin reminded me of this interview and has also written a very moving tribute and in blogging it would be remiss of me not to direct you towards that at … http://indygalonindependence.blogspot.co.uk/

When I first heard of Steve’s sudden illness, I had just attended two meetings organised by the STUC as part of its campaign “A Just Scotland”, which is looking at the significant challenges facing Scotland, as part of its approach for the Referendum campaign.  The comparisons with other countries as part of this process gave plenty of food for thought.

Senior Trade Unionists and Academics made rational and measured contributions.

Among the key findings I noted were ;

(1) The infamous IFS report does not suggest that an Independent Scotland would have less money to spend, and should have compared an Independent Scotland with Scotland in the UK, and not Scotland v the UK.

(2)  More importantly, they state that the key issue in terms of finances is one of demographics - an issue that remains whether YES or No is successful.

(3) Income Inequality - the UK has one of the highest gaps in Europe

(4) If all workers not in receipt of the Living Wage, were to be paid it, there would be increased income tax revenues of £550m.

(5) Only in 9 out of the last 69 months have real wages risen.

(6) Workers whose pay and conditions were covered by collective bargaining in 1979,have gone from 81% in Scotland to 23%.

(7) Trade Union membership in Scotland now stands at 32.3% of workers, in Sweden that figure is 69%

These are fascinating statistics, and demonstrate the real challenges the country faces, and the STUC should be thanked for facilitating these events. 

It does however reveal key weaknesses in the Better Together armoury.  As John McInally of the PCS put it.........."if No means more cuts,  austerity, and more privatisation then Scotland will leave the UK.  “ As Ed Miliband has just confirmed that a future Labour government in Westminster would still sing from the same austerity hymn sheet that hits the poorest hardest then what was a concern has just become a reality – a No vote means more of the same with NO possibility of change. That is only tip of the iceberg – and I’ll address that in a future blog post, but at the moment it’s sad to reflect how far the Labour party has moved away from its roots and fails to recognise the opportunities for real change through supporting workers rights and building a new dynamic in an independent Scotland.

The key message that trade union activists recognise is that employment law affects pay, conditions, and the wider economy including welfare. A Fair Work Commission, and a National Convention on Employment and Labour Relations would be a good place to start on addressing these challenges. That opportunity is there to be grasped, and increasingly many people are participating in shaping and discussing what makes a Just Scotland and what is our Common Weal and thinking outside narrow tribal party interests. A YES vote isn’t a vote for the SNP , it’s a vote for the possibility of change and for opening the door to new opportunities. A NO vote is a vote for more of the same diet of austerity and squeezing of public services that hasn’t served the workers of Scotland well in the past decades.

Consulting the Members

The blog is back! and firstly I should note my delight that a former leader of the best employer I ever worked for, Strathclyde Regional Council, has endorsed Independence.  Well done Charles Gray!

I am moved to share my thoughts on the continuing debate within the Trade Union movement on Independence given the mysterious decision of the GMB to announce that they back a No vote. Mysterious in the sense of lack of clarity about how this decision was reached.

The GMB position as announced by their leadership is curious.  Here's a resolution that the GMB put the Scottish Trades Union Congress this year;

"That this Congress notes the continual contraction of the Scottish Economy, the rise in unemployment, particularly youth unemployment and the clear evidence that Austerity is NOT working. What jobs there are, are temporary, insecure, part-time and low wage....
Congress believes that there is an alternative path based on a people-centred economics, which puts democracy at the heart of it.
Congress calls for the development of credible, popular alternative based on common ownership. Investment in public services based on need, a manufacturing renaissance and full and fulfilling employment as an urgent macroeconomic goal, greater industrial economic democracy, including co-operatives, pension fund reform and proper investment in and the reconstruction of, our industrial base. This requires a wide- ranging STUC led campaign, building on the platform of, There is a Better Way."
Also reads like the Common Weal project to me. 

Last week the Scottish Council of the GMB voted to support the No campaign.  How does this motion square with the statements by both Labour and the Tories that over £2 billion of cuts are on the way in 2015? 

Having spoken to many GMB members over the last two days, I can say that they are in shock at this decision.  Claims of an extensive consultation appear wide of the mark - a consultation can only be a consultation if members feel involved - and can be described as patchy at best.

Here's some of the questions GMB members have been asking;

(1) How were consultation meetings advertised, and why do so many members claim they didn't know about them?
(2) How many attended meetings?
(3) Were both sides of the debate asked to send representatives to engage in hustings?
(4) Was a vote taken at these meetings?
(5) Why make the decision now, before publication of the White Paper, and the Labour Party's report on further devolution of powers?
(6) What was the level of engagement?
(7) Why were members not balloted on an issue of such importance?
(7) How does this square with the STUC stance of asking both sides questions, and keeping a neutral approach?

GMB members deserve answers to these basic questions.  If the process has been found to be flawed, they have a duty to re-open the consultation.

We now have 5 Trade unions, traditional full time official led - as opposed to lay member led - making decisions on members behalf on how their money will spent on the Independence Referendum.  In each case, the level of  trade union member engagement and consultation is open to question.  In most cases, these Trade Unions have lost members - usually to other Trade Unions.

Other Trade Unions should think very carefully about how they engage with their members on this issue, and should serve as a warning that top down diktats will alienate their members.

In a time of deregulated markets, a low wage economy, attacks on health and safety legislation and cuts to the public sector, the role and function of Trade unions is as important as ever.  The Trade Union movement, as the largest part of Scottish Civic Society, has a duty to full engage with members on the biggest political decision in decades.  Those Trade Unions backing No appear to have done members a disservice.

Finally, I am curious as to where Trade Union funds will go.  It was my understanding that United with Labour was created to give trade union activists and labour party members some space to campaign to remain in the UK in the absence of Conservatives.  What exactly is the relationship between United with Labour and Better Together?

Union members are entitled to know where and how their money is being spent on campaigning and what exactly is funded by whom to do what. In other words...follow the money ?

ITS TIME FOR TRADE UNIONS TO DITCH NEW LABOUR

Hoping to claw back some semblance of control as the Falkirk debacle unfolds, Ed Miliband has launched  a "reform" of trade union levies going into the Labour Party.

Whilst the aim of "opting-in" is entirely laudable, and to a certain degree already operates in practice within UNISON, a key statistic not widely reported in the media is that over 360,000 UNITE members do not pay the political levy to Labour.

Other Trade Unions correctly take the view that their political fund should be used to fund campaigns of candidates of various political parties - for example the Fire Brigades Union who have funded campaigns of the last two parliamentary elections campaigns I have been involved in.  The RMT similarly fund campaigns in this way, both unions choosing to support candidates who have a track record in supporting fairness at work.

The problem,( depending on your point of view), is that explicitly funding a candidate of a political party other than that of the Labour party results in that trade union being expelled by Labour.

I am prepared to wager that the above scenario will remain the case in this so-called Labour reform.

UNITE have a point when they criticise their arch-nemesis Progress for indulging in the same sort of candidate fixing that they are accused of in the Falkirk case. Actually, a glance at any Left labour blogs can provide chapter and verse on the inglorious history of New Labour fixing to purge any candidates with anything other than strict adherence to centre right orthodoxies. Ironic that Falkirk is the seat under the spotlight as the deliberate exclusion of Denis Canavan in the run up to 1999 is the prime example of this so the double think airbrushing of history that the current leadership are hoping to achieve.

All of which leads to the following conclusions;

Firstly with New Labour, supporters of austerity, taking a similar path to the Tory-led Government, why shouldn't trade unions, in this age of multi-party politics not fund campaigns of those seeking political office whose views and values are sympathetic to the Trade Union Movement - SNP, Plaid Cymru, the various Socialist Parties, and indeed Labour candidates. It's tempting to label those as "what's left of the left" in the Labour party, but it's simplistic and trite to label those who support  workers rights, decent working conditions and fair pay as "Left" - but let's leave challenging the language of the right wing media for another day.

Secondly, if candidate fixing is ok for Progress and not the Trade Unions, what legitimate voice and role remains for the trade union movement in todays British Labour Party?

Thirdly, if this is a step to reduce trade union influence (openly admitted by the leadership) then surely it is time for unions to look elsewhere? Members may wonder what precisely their hard earned subs are going toward if unions will carry less influence than a think tank or lobbying firm when looking to advance their cause of protecting jobs and conditions ?

Surely now, more than ever, it is time for trade unions to ditch New Labour.

ITS TIME TO TACKLE TAX AVOIDANCE

The European Commission estimates that the costs of tax evasion are 1 trillion euros a year – more than the combined debts of each EU member’s state.

Let’s consider that shocking statistic for a moment, and reflect that if it were not for tax avoidance or evasion then these times of austerity may not have been necessary.  All the pain and suffering could have been avoided if some unscrupulous companies had acted in a proper fashion.

  For that reason, I support a Financial Transaction Tax in which the money raised in that country goes to the member state.

Tackling Tax avoidance and evasion rather than making some of the poorest in our society suffer through so called welfare reforms should be among the top priorities of the EU.

 

ITS TIME FOR BETTER WORKERS RIGHTS

As someone who started working when Thatcher was Prime Minister the EU was looked upon as the saviour of public sector workers as TUPE provided a degree of protection against Thatcherism, however conversely Europe took a rightward shift.

As austerity has kicked in an assault on workers’ rights has taken place, most notably by an ideological right wing government at Westminster who have removed health and safety protection and cut the statutory redundancy notice period to 45 days.

As casualisation increases the EU need to protect working people in Europe.

We need to create a set of core standards that apply to all workers.  We also need to address the EU Posted Workers Directive to ensure that migrant workers are paid the same rates of pay, thus closing a loophole in which companies choose migrant workers to drive down wages.

 

ITS TIME TO CHANGE PROCUREMENT REGULATIONS

One of the major bugbears for public sector workers and elected parliamentarians and councillors seeking to secure jobs with decent wages and conditions is EU Procurement Regulations.

They must be changed.

My own experiences of these regulations came about in 2000 when the then Scottish Executive outsourced the maintenance of Trunk Road contracts citing EU Rules , and then more recently when Glasgow City Council outsourced its glass recycling service – bizarrely the Council claimed at Committee that this service was not being delivered in-house, only to admit to the Trade Unions that it was months later.

 

 

Both these experiences bitterly exposed the lack of protection of workers transferring from one body to another, and the lack of social clauses of these contracts.  In the recent glass recycling case there was no provision to adhere to the Glasgow Living Wage, making it much easier for a private contractor to claim the contract. 

In addition to this, Both Central and Local Government appear hamstrung to use Procurement to support local economies to strengthen communities, by ensuring contracts are given to local firms.

That’s why I believe Procurement Regulations need to be changed, to introduce social clauses protecting workers, and their wages, and to allow Procurement decisions to be taken in a way that can consider local economic factors.

 

 

Its Time to End Austerity

This will be first of four blogs over the next few days articulating what I believe to be the main issues facing the EU at the elections next year, and where I believe I can play a part as an SNP MEP.

It truly is time to end austerity, why? It has failed.  It has failed to reduce debt, as debt is rising; it has reduced living standards across the continent causing economies to remain stagnant, and has failed to deal with tax avoidance and evasion.  Common sense alone dictates that repeat doses of harsh medicine that obviously isn’t working is certain to maintain the economic malaise afflicting Europe rather than affect a steady recovery.

As STUC research has shown in Scotland 70p in every £ of public money ends up in the private sector economy, I see no difference in that happening elsewhere.

To grow the economy we need investment.  We need the EU to spend in infrastructure across Europe, providing incentives to those receiving that investment to provide jobs, skills and training to young people aged between 16 and 25 years of age.  Youth Unemployment is a scourge in our society which needs to be dealt with.  The Scottish Government rightly invests in Modern Apprenticeships and Europe must use this example.  Youth Unemployment in some parts of Europe is over 50%.  We can provide further opportunities here and abroad to tackle youth unemployment, and provide the infrastructure required to grow the economy.

With Balls and Miliband’s recent U-turns by suggesting austerity will continue, it is left to the Scottish National Party to fight to end austerity measures – and surely now only             Independence can now deliver the real opportunity to deliver a better way and a better society.

Austerity is merely an excuse to drive down living standards and wages, to reduce the states capacity to affect real positive changes to our economies, and to drive us at the mercy of market driven choices.

It hasn’t worked – it’s time for a better way.

 

Poverty of Ambition

It is hard not to come to the inescapable conclusion that the strongest weapon in the Referendum campaign for a YES vote is the performance, and utterances from the official opposition at Westminster.

Today's statement from Ed Balls demonstrates that things won't change anytime soon, if Scotland retains its place in the UK.  The statement that only a Labour Westminster Government can deliver social justice and so wait till 2015 is now a fanciful and risible notion.

The attack on universalism is a dangerous course, -  how far does mean testing go, if we start with winter fuel payments, then what is next?  Surely Peter Hain is correct when he says " if middle Britain ceased to benefit from the welfare state through some of the few universal benefits that are left, how can we convince them to fund the larger part of that budget through their taxes?”

Surely providing some universal benefits for everyone is a matter that encourages citizenship and electors to fund the welfare budget through taxation?

And how much does means testing cost?

Curiously, Peter Mandelson outlined in his book The Third Man, the debates which took place in 2010, where he persuaded Gordon Brown that cuts had to made rather than grow the economy out of the crisis.  This being the case then, Brown was correct and Mandelson was wrong.

If Labour do support a continuance of austerity where does that leave them with their European colleagues?

In my recent visit to Brussels I listened to the former Minister for the National Economy for Greece, who advocated massive cuts to the public sector, including cutting jobs, wages and welfare payments. (perhaps a good reason why he was the former minister).  This proposed medicine would only make the Greek situation worse.

As the European Union realises that austerity measures aren't working, why are Labour going down the same road as the Conservatives?  What is noticeable is the tired and dreary vision being recycled by a shadow cabinet led by former policy advisers who are stuck in a 1990's timewarp, convinced that what won the election in 1997 was "iron discipline"  i.e. sticking to Tory spending limits - and that this bitter medicine should be prescribed again. Once again proving that Labour are a party with a past, and not much of a future.

It is a grave error indeed to suggest that demonstrating you can be trusted to run the economy means more cuts and more restraint.  The answer to austerity is to grow the economy and invest.

An Evening with Denis Goldberg

In an age when the phrase "modern day hero" is often overused, It was a privilege and a pleasure to meet on Friday night, a man who certainly qualifies as one to many people not only in South Africa but across the world.....Denis Goldberg.

At a fundraiser in the City Chambers for his charity, Community Heart, a packed room listened intently to his recollection of the ANC's struggle to overcome apartheid, and the challenges facing South Africa to transform a society and how this can be a long and slow process.

Denis demonstrated his love of poetry and in particular, Rabbie Burns reciting A Mans a man for a' that (one of my favourites).

The discrimination faced by black South Africans in schooling, medical care and housing was highlighted, as well as the campaign called African claims - a forerunner to the UN Human Rights charter.

Denis thanked those around the world for the support and international pressure, which he believes kept him and other ANC leaders alive during the Rivonia Trail - the 50th anniversary of which is this year.  Denis survived 22 years in jail, which he believes was worth it to see the end of apartheid.

He made a statement which has stuck with me since Friday night - Dreams become reality when you mobilise people.

Although he accepts that South Africa faces many challenges, he correctly in my view articulated the advances that have been made in that 90% of South African children go to school (half didn't under apartheid), that universities are now populated by people who under apartheid were denied the choice, the millions of South Africans who now have access to running water, and the massive house building to accommodate its people.  These are huge advances in the lives of South Africans.

He also spoke about the complexity of transforming a country into a functioning democracy and that this would be a long slow process.

The night would not have been complete of course without highlighting the excellent work undertaken by Community Heart, and his encouragement of children to read and to take up music.

I am delighted that Glasgow City UNISON continues to fund these projects, and that the Scottish Government has provided support.

A very serious man, who reminded us all that the roots of injustice and poverty lie in the unequal distribution of reward for those who labour and those who own - and that struggle is universal and not confined to one country.

The Level of Debate

The news that ASLEF have showed their hand by formally backing the No Campaign - whilst disappointing, is no surprise given they were already providing financial support.

I am not sure what mechanisms of consultation were used to engage their membership, but I find the claim that not one member will vote for Independence incredibly silly.

Other Trade Unions are correctly taking a longer term view and engaging with their members through the STUC "A Just Scotland" consultation, which correctly challenges all sides of the debate to demonstrate how the options will benefit the lives of working people.

But lets come back to ASLEF.  Simple research uncovers a rather offensive article in their Newsletter last year, where a certain Tom Burns of their Perth Branch wrote in inflammatory terms.

Among the gems of criticism were

(a) no guarantees that the heirs of Queen Elizabeth would be head of state in an Independent Scotland
(b) the stated intentions of multinationals to relocate south of the border - without naming anyone in particular
(c) That Holyrood is a single legislative chamber with no checks and balances - but the devolved parliament isn't a stand alone institution and ignores the ongoing debate about where powers should sit at an even further local level in Scotland
(d) That the SNP Government discriminates against English Students - ignoring legal context
(e) The SNP is anti-English - despite the existence of English born parliamentarians and Government Ministers and activists who are entirely comfortable with campaigning for independence - as it's about the right to self-determination not tribalism

It is of course the prerogative of ASLEF to publish such arrant nonsense, but leaves serious questions as to why such an article would find itself in a Trade Union news sheet, as is the decision to show their hand in the constitutional debate now.

Interestingly the debate within the Trade Unions is beginning to heat up after STUC Congress and UK Conferences due to take place over the Summer.

The Jimmy Reid Foundation also has very useful suggestions, in its new document "The Common Weal", on the type of economic and social renewal that can take place in Scotland - looking at examples in the Nordic and Germanic countries.  Dealing with issues such as Tax reform, welfare, a proper investment bank, and various models of company ownership are just some of the issues which should lead the debate over the next year or so within the Trade Union Movement.

The level of the debate within Trade Unions has the capacity to lead the way, and perhaps ASLEF will regret showing their hand and their arguments so early on - as all it would take to completely undermine their stance is for one single ASLEF member to come forward and express their support for independence.

THE FOLLY OF UKIP

Possibly due to being a largely English electoral phenomenon, I have not really encountered UKIP until recently, and only saw them register in the margins in canvassing and survey returns.

My first real engagement with them was last month at a Strathclyde University debate where I was on the side of the UK remaining in Europe - which won handsomely in a vote at the end.

During the debate the UKIP spokesperson in answering what was a reasonable point on the success of ERASMUS - a body which enables higher education students to work and study abroad as part of their degree stated that this body was designed to "enslave today's students to be part of the EU bureaucracy."

A rather dangerous and eccentric view to put it politely.

There is something deeply troubling about their rhetoric on immigration, their outlook to our partner countries in Europe, and their simplistic approach to leaving the EU.  Indeed it appears to have passed them by that joining the European Free Trade Alliance would result in them having to sign up to their pet hates of European Regulation to be part of that body too.

UKIP are on the side of those who see workers rights and hard fought protections such as the Social Chapter (deemed too left wing incidentally, by Major, Blair, and Brown) as troublesome regulation, whilst opposing a financial transactions tax and the capping of bankers bonuses.

On your side? No chance.

The mutual talking up of a Conservative/UKIP arrangement in a future UK election demonstrates that the electoral survival of Tory MP's is more important than being part of a rational debate about our relationships in the world and having a positive vision for our future.The case being put forward to leave the EU is based on a fantasy of turning back the clock to 1973 without consequences - a fanciful delusion.

The case for staying in an institution that has improved the lives and working conditions of millions of working people in Europe, now needs to made in a concise, clear and positive way.

The case for leaving the EU, is a classic case of the race to the bottom.

THE RIGHT TURN

As much as I've been entertained by the farcical 500 questions from the Better Together campaign (providing light relief for a holiday weekend) , the matter of the English local elections and their potential significant bearing on Scotland's decision in September 2014 has been the hot topic this weekend.

Two immediate thoughts spring to mind.  Firstly,  on this showing, Labour will not be elected as the next Westminster Government in 2015.  The rule of thumb from considered political experts is that they needed approx 500 gains to be in a position at this stage of the political cycle to be heading in that direction.  Labour gained half that total.

This fact will no doubt worry Labour activists, and will I am sure lead to some debate as to whether they continue the Tory-lite approach favoured by the Westminster Front Bench , or do they start to provide a clear narrative articulating their differences with the Tories? 

Secondly, and perhaps related was that the rise of the UKIP vote demonstrates that Scotland and England are becoming two, distinct, political countries.  As a regular delegate to the UNISON UK Conference, the reaction from Scottish TU colleagues listening to the challenges faced by TU members elsewhere in the UK, is met with support but also relief that some of the attacks facing public sector workers - for example the abandonment of the two tier workforce agreement by the Tory led Government - are not being faced here in Scotland.

Whilst the defeat of the BNP in Burnley is most welcome, the results indicate a move to the right.  The UKIP agenda of playing to prejudice and grievance, of trying to blame someone else for the country's problems rather than the Government plays into the Tories hands.

The sight on Friday afternoon of Simon Hughes of the Liberal Democrats discussing anti-immigration measures is testament to that.

But perhaps the harshest lesson is that the rise of the UKIP vote, and the pandering to it by the Tories, is that the biggest threat to Scotland's place in Europe, is not an Independent Scotland, but by staying in the UK.

Lets consider this, there is no doubt that Cameron will veto measures such as, a financial transactions tax, limits on bankers bonuses, and extensions to social protections. Are these not policies that a Scottish Government and most Scots find favour with?

16 YEARS ON

A chance conversation earlier this evening with a UNISON Branch Secretary got me thinking - he revealed that today was his daughters 16th birthday, and so she was born the same day that Labour was elected or Tony Blair got his hands on the reins of power -  depending on your viewpoint

Indeed - the New Labour Project with its figurehead Tony Blair won in a landslide 16 years ago.  My thoughts today turn to the mess the Labour Party finds itself in now.

What was once a confident looking, positive party has been reduced to a small minded, vitriolic, inconsistent shambles.

In my time at the STUC Annual Congress when talking to delegates their real concern was the association with the Tories in the Better Together campaign.  A perfectly justified concern, given the many public pronouncements from Better Together come from a centre right political position - witness the huge publicity afforded comments from the CBI yesterday as a classic example. As one Labour activist commented privately " I didn't come into politics to wrap myself in the Union Jack and campaign alongside Tories ".

Add in a very public attack on the UNITE General Secretary from Ed Miliband and it's little wonder that many Trade Union activists are supporting Independence.

With the Westminster Labour front bench being led to the right by the Tory-led Government on the economy and welfare (and can we reclaim the language by using "Social Security" whenever possible ?) , the joy and relief on that morning in 1997 when the Tories had been ousted, seems generations away.


This week Labour have a difficult juggling act to pull off - attack the Tories in England to win council seats in the local elections (but not frighten the horses aka Daily Mail readers who might vote UKIP instead), but at the same time retain the base vote being hardest hit by public spending cuts, but not be tagged as Red Ed,  but keep the trade union funding and support (by verbally biting the hand that feeds you through the subscriptions of low paid workers - very odd, Ed) - and at the same time have your Scottish party members campaigning using materials funded by questionable sources and working Better Together alongside Tories ? Tricky..
Their desperation to secure a No vote in 2014 and the increasingly tribal, bitter nature of the attacks on all independence campaigners (and even against the thoughtful, not made their minds up, willing to have a decent debate people ) is entirely down to one clear dynamic - the survival of the Labour party as an electoral force is dependent on Scotland's votes and a cohort of MP's ( Cohort is the kind word) to boost the Labour numbers on the green benches in Westminster. Victory (or a negotiating mandate with any Libdems that are left after their ride into the valley of electoral death in 2015) is not a given - and without those Labour Scottish MP's  Miliband minor will never walk through the door of number 10.

16 years on, the conclusion can only sensibly be - don't let the survival of the "people's party" (largely populated by shiny clones who've never worked outside of the political career bubble)  be more important than a decent debate about Scotland's future and let's not have the largely self centered and biased worldview of the Labour tribe get in the way of the facts.

BEDROOM TAX - BLUE LABOUR?

Thousands of people were marching today to protest against yet another weapon being deployed in the Con-Dem war of attrition on the poor- the Bedroom Tax – the tip of a deadly iceberg, the latest in a tsunami of cuts set to devastate families and hit the disabled hardest. This is even before Universal Credit, a tornado of chaos due to hit in October. The only faint hope lies in an announcement sneaked out late on Thursday. The DWP are delaying three out of the four pilot Universal Credit projects due to go live on April Fools Day.  The best case scenario is that IT glitches and the sheer unworkability of this welfare “deform” will see it hit the buffers before the next Westminster election…except…what difference would it make if the Tories are booted out and New Labour come to power again in Westminster ?

It is a truth that has to be universally acknowledged (apologies to Jane Austen) that despite the real and genuine opposition to the bedroom tax and “welfare reform” amongst grassroots Labour and their trade union comrades, their leaders in the Shadow Cabinet and most of their MP’s are in a different head space. Labour MP’s are currently displaying levels of industrial deception (and possibly self-deception, to be kind to some of them) by running around their constituencies collecting signatures on petitions opposing the bedroom tax without any intention of repealing said tax if in a position to do so.

This is the acid test for Labour, and especially Labour in Scotland. Predictably enough there have been howls of outrage at the SNP and other parties in the Yes campaign pointing out that the consensus in Scotland is against punishing the most vulnerable in our society by implementing crude measures such as the bedroom tax. Therefore, a vote for independence in 2014 is the only way to ensure those powers to decide what sort of society we want and what measures we put in place to support those most in need will be in the hands of our local decision makers. Welfare and benefits are not devolved, nor are all the economic levers in place to control the finance required for a socially just Scotland. Apparently, pointing this out is “cynical party political point scoring”.

Surely there is a degree of cynicism in pretending to be against policies that your leadership team have every intention of implementing when/if they come to power? I stand to be corrected, but what with Liam”no money left” Byrne as Shadow Work + Pensions minister and a track record from his colleagues of equivocal statements all round (a YouTube clip of Helen Goodman trending on twitter, Ed Balls still talking about a “tough but fair” approach to welfare reform) , it’s fair to say the Labour Party could be accused of facing both ways at once. Campaigning against the very welfare “reforms” they will sadly, reluctantly have to continue with as unfortunately when we all vote out those nasty Tories, they open up the books and, oh, guess what..there’s still no money left…Well, surely politics is all about the choices we make especially when finances are tight and choosing to dismantle the welfare state is an odd choice for a democratic socialist party..

The Bedroom Tax is the most pernicious piece of legislation since the Poll Tax, and arguably worse.  It is designed to divide the poorest and weakest in our society.

If the official opposition at Westminster continue to show a lack of vision or a real alternative to the current path of austerity, then a No vote in September 2014 is a vote for no change at Westminster.

Making Our Mark

My pitch to be one of the SNP Candidates for the European Election

MAKING OUR MARK IN EUROPE AND THE WORLD

Friends

 Thanks to my colleagues who have supported me, the

Constituencies who nominated me, all of you for to speaking to

 Me and my colleagues who hope to represent Scotland in Europe.

I joined the SNP at 16 years of age,

 My first subs were paid for with my paper round -   in those days

I was paid a penny a paper!

 It was a long paper-round.

What drew me to this party almost 25 years ago is that it best reflects the values of

Internationalism, Social democracy and compassion for those at

home and abroad that we all share.

In submitting my name, I am so conscious of the serious

 Responsibility to deliver for the people of Scotland.

The responsibility to make our mark in Europe and across the

World.

We all know what happens in Europe is crucial to Scotland.

 Why else are our opponents trying using the EU as a scare story

Against Independence

Why else are they trying to create problems when none exist?

Why are they so scared of a strong Scottish voice in Europe?

What matters to Scotland is to build relationships and provide a

 Positive contribution to the EU and beyond.

Our opponents prefer an insular and narrow minded argument

I hope to follow in some pretty big footsteps because over

Centuries scots have made their mark in Europe.

 like the very first President of our party Robert Bontine

Cunninghame Graham, who

Made his mark travelling seeing the potential of a Europe of

Enterprise compassion and democracy

 before becoming a folk hero in South America.

  A former Liberal MP, founder of the Scottish Labour Party, who

Then made his political Journey to found the SNP

 He remains an inspiration to all of us, and dare I say should to the labour party

Here in Scotland

 After all he decided that the snp was the true home for the values

Of fairness and equality……………..

Some years later another great Scot, Winnie Ewing, an inspiration

to us all, gave Scotland a powerful Voice in Europe,

 securing for the Scottish Highlands European Funding.

And now today in the European Parliament our mep’s are

Doing great work to ensure Scotland’s voice is heard.

So what do I want to do?  I spent the first years of my life in

Drumchapel. I have seen communities in poverty. and seen the

desperate need for investment, and neglect from an uncaring

 Westminster

To suit its anti european agenda the UK Continues to fail to apply

for Funding that could transform Scottish Communities.

Whether it is funding for small and medium business, or social

funds to help the long term unemployed, I will fight to get the

best deal for Scotland

I want to represent Scotland to ensure all of our communities get

Access to funds vital in securing recovery

I want Scotland to continue to make its mark by showing our abilities as a nation to make

friends and to ensure that our interests are respected

In looking at the stories of our friends and partners, in Europe, we

can see why Independence is Essential. 

 Scots are being ground down by a cold, ideological cuts agenda

 That few recognise or support.

If we are in a worldwide crisis why are other countries taking a

different route?

 Take America, where President Obama recognises investment in

people and jobs is the most Effective recession busting strategy….

Can they see that at Westminster?  No they can’t!

 On my first day in Brussels I will fight against the tory

Threat to abandon the social chapter, an agreement that

has improved the lives of millions of working people including

here in Scotland

   We know that Independence will protect the rights of working people

 Westminster repeatedly fails to do so,

I support our MEP’s in seeking changes to Procurement

regulations, which are currently complex and problematic

So that decisions affecting Scottish workers and their families are

taken here in Scotland. so we can strengthen the

Rights of workers, so we can boost their wages, so we can create thriving communities,

I am ready to play my part in that transformation

Those who of you who know me are aware, in my Trade

 Union Activism, my experience of negotiation, and the issues I hold dear. 

 In Europe I will work tirelessly on issues that matter and impact

 on the lives of scots every single

Day,

 standing up for our fishing communities

  And our farming and rural communities

Standing up for the Cities where lack of investment has left

Deprivation that shame a country prevented from doing so much

More for its people

I will stand up for Every Scottish community abandoned by every

Westminster party

 Selection for the list is a very great honour, as is the opportunity

 To serve our nation.

 I realise you have a difficult decision to make.

 I know how I will cast my vote, but

Everyone submitting their name is an asset to our party.

 I hope you support my nomination and

I look forward to campaigning alongside all of you for the

European election to come and as we deliver independence

For Scotland