Brighton Green
- This topic has 65 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"Tories on bikes"
Special Report | Major split in Green Party as Caroline Lucas joins Brighton wildcat strike
Quote:As the wildcat strike of refuse workers in Brighton and Hove continues, splits in the Green Party are becoming ever more apparent in the context of a “summer of strikes” promised for 2013.
Today, Caroline Lucas MP joined the 300-strong sit-in, expressing her “unequivocal support” and telling the workers she was doing all she could to get Jason Kitcat (the Brighton & Hove Council leader who has been labeled a “renegade councillor” by members of his own party) to rethink the pay slashes. The “pay modernisation” scheme, which affects 8,000-strong workforce of Brighton and Hove City Council, could mean that refuse and recycling staff at Hollingdean depot lose up to £4,000 a year.
(Headline taken from this article – http://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/brighton-workers/).
Sorry to link and run, but time is short: but there are lessons in this story about how to behave in local government, and about the Green party in general.
alanjjohnstone wrote:One thing we have to be clear upon and what Luxemburg explicitly explains – the SPD will only be the party of opposition , regardless of the reformist position and won't enter parliament/council in coalition to take office or minority party to run capitalism' and end up in the same predicament as the Greens in Brighton. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/15/greens-blown-it-in-brightonThis from another thread can also usefully appear here too. The Greens are running Brighton as a minority administration. Next year they will be forced to make cuts as a result of central government funding being reduced and, having taken responsibility for running capitalist administration at local level, have to decide what to do. Apparently there are some Green councillors would want to pursue the same policy as proposed by TUSC. The Guardian journalist met one of them
Quote:Ben Duncan is one of the alleged watermelons, and the councillor who accused Kitcat of betrayal in his blogpost.(….) Now, he is really on the warpath. There is mileage, he reckons, in the idea of the Greens following the lead of Trotskyite Labour councillors in 1980s Liverpool, refusing to set a cuts-based budget, and thereby putting Brighton in the vanguard of UK-wide anti-austerity resistance.Appropriately enough, we meet in a city-centre cafe called the Red Roaster. "I think we need to do something that makes people think: 'Hang on – if you vote for the Greens you get something different,'" he tells me. "On behalf of people around the country, we need to make it Brighton and Hove versus this government, about austerity. We should either refuse to set a budget or try and set a budget that under the current legislation would be unlawful, and say to the government, 'Well, you come in and do it – you see how local people benefit from you sending a hit squad in to take over from elected politicians who won't deliver your austerity measures.'"Makes you wonder if some Trotskyists have decided to "enter" the Green Party. The Green Leader of the Council is opposed to this:
Quote:Kitcat isn't impressed. "It's absurd, frankly," he says. "Gestures like that will actually change nothing for residents, because the government will impose a budget on the council anyway."True.
Coincidentally (?) DarrenO has posted a 1928 SS article that discusses the issue of local councils and the SPGB approach to them. http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2013/12/socialists-and-local-government.html "While the central government is in the hands of the capitalist class it is obvious that local bodies can act only within the limits which it suits the government to impose. Here again it is for the Socialist electors to decide whether in any given issue it is better to act within the law or defy it and have their powers taken away. The important point to bear in mind all the time is that while Socialism cannot be achieved by local Councils, whether they accept or reject these laws, neither the Socialist members of such Councils nor their electors would be under any illusion."
That blast from the past is very good. We can use it next time we face opposition from TUSC candidates, probably in next year's London borough elections.
It makes you wonder just how many other gems there are that are still relevant in todays debates.I have now given up all hope of ever seeing the whole archive of the Socialist Standard on-line…another year passes, alas…but all credit to the two Darrens for doing the next best thing.
What was interesting about that 1928 reply was that it said that a Socialist councillor, if so instructed by those socialists who elected them, could vote to defy the law, contrary to the embarrassing episode in one of the local by-elections we contested this year where a party member questioned another candidate's right to stand for saying he would be prepared to defy the law.Presumably the editorial committee had in mind incidents like Poplar rates rebellion of 1921:http://www.20thcenturylondon.org.uk/poplar-rates-rebellion-1921
On the Left Unity thread many wondered why the necessity when there already existed the Green Party which promoted LU policies.The Guardian has eventually got around to asking why the Left do not support the Greens more. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/06/left-ignoring-true-progressive-party-greens?CMP=twt_gu They appear to be following now the same approach as the SNP have been doing in Scotland, that they are the left of centre party. But it is nice that the Greens refer to some history recalling th 1906 election.
alanjjohnstone wrote:But it is nice that the Greens refer to some history recalling th 1906 election.Yes, but typically inaccurately. Nearly all the 29 Labour MPs elected in the 1906 General Election were elected as a result of an electoral deal with the Liberals, not in opposition to them as Sinclair suggests.At that time some constituencies elected 2 MPs. The deal was that, in some seats, there would be one Liberal and one Labour candidate whose supporters would cast their second vote for the other party. The Labour MPs, elected with Liberal support, then formed themselves into the Parliamentary "Labour Party" and generally supported the Liberal government. To get any more representation in parliament the Greens would have to do a deal with Labour or the LibDems (as they probably already have done at local level).Interesting article, but I think many "leftwingers" have already been voting Green in elections. At least that's what we discovered in the London Assembly and local council elections we've contested. For instance, prominent SWPer Paul Holborrow admitted voting Green (rather than Socialist) in Lambeth & Southwark in the 2012 GLA election (but would we have wanted his vote anyway?). The person who chaired a TUSC election meeting in Merton & Wandsworth where we also had a candidate told us he was doing the same.I hadn't realised that Russel Brand had modified the rigid anti-vote stance he took in the interview with Paxman:
Quote:Writing in the Guardian, Russell Brand urged people not to vote: "The only reason to vote is if the vote represents power or change. I don't think it does." However, he ended the article arguing "I believe in change… A system that serves the planet and the people. I'd vote for that."[emphasis added]Not that the Green Party stands for that. They stand for an impossible small-scale capitalism.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/16/green-councillors-brighton-referendum-council-tax-riseMore on the dilemma of administrating capitalism.Kitcat said: "The coalition's cuts mean we cannot deliver the services we were elected to provide and which our consciences say we should provide. We have no choice but to seek the views of local people on funding these services through a tax increase."
This is a very clever move by a local council opposed to the cuts. It has already removed the Labour Party's excuse that the councils they control are merely implementing Tory-LibDem decided cuts and exposed them as being in favour of implementing them fully. In fact they're even talking about a Labour-Tory adminstration to push them through. As to the Tories bleating about the cost of the referendum, what hypocrisy when they are committed to a much more expensive and quite irrelevant national referendum on the EU. The Brighton referendum if it takes place will be a revealing test of public opinion on the cuts..I wonder how TUSC will react. They can no longer denounce the Greens as "Tories on bikes". In fact I wonder how a Socialist in Brighton would vote.
It looks as if TUSC will be opposed to holding the referendum and to campaigning, if it takes place (which is far from certain), for a No vote. This, from their draft programme for May's local council elections:
Quote:Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts.The Greens are claiming to have the support of the local GMB and Unison branch secretaries:http://www.brightonhovegreens.org/news/social-care-budget-referendum-proposal-gains-strength-with-support-from-union-leaders.htmlThey've also got the support of this lot (whoever they are).
ALB wrote:They've also got the support of this lot (whoever they are).Judging by the signatories to an open letter to the Guardian just another rag-bag collection of reformists.This from the Compass website:
Quote:Who we areCompass is a home for those who want to build and be a part of a Good Society; one where equality, sustainability and democracy are not mere aspirations, but a living reality. We are founded on the belief that no single issue or political party can usher in this future alone as the world is too complex to change with one solution or one organisation. Compass is a place where people come together to create the visions, alliances and actions that will build our Good Society.How we make a good society a realityCreate a unique space for people across different political parties (and those with no party affiliation) as well as activists, thinkers and doers who share our valuesFrom this place we produce policies, discuss them and campaign together inside and outside Parliament and National assembliesInfluence party politics; we persuade politicians and political parties to support policies and ways of doing politics that are in line with a good societyProvide political education to help members and activists make change in our increasingly complex world on the local, national, UK and European levelsBehave in ways that replicate what we want a Good Society to look and feel like.Far chance! Will these people never learn?
Simon Jenkins of the Guardian comes out in support although i think his remark that the Greens are the pawns of the Big Renewables maybe a bit tongue in the cheek http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/23/brighton-council-tax-revolution-democracy-eric-pickles-green-party
Just received a reply from the local SPEW branch:
Quote:Essentially we see the referendum as another move by the Greens to try and find a way to lessen the impact of the cuts locally, in this case by raising taxes. However we don't see that as much of a choice for people, higher taxes – or worse cuts? If they really wanted to stop cuts, then the best way would be to fight the government for more funding.This could be done by setting a "needs budget", working out what money the city needs for its services and jobs and then demanding that from local government by waging a massive campaign.They may be out of line with their key target group here, i.e workers in the public sector. In any event, as we've always said, if people are not prepared to vote for something they won't be prepared to strike or take "direct action" for it. Not that the government is likely to provide more funding given the need to give priority to profits and profit-making by cutting government spending to reduce taxes on capitalist enterprises.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.