Local Election Campaign 2017
- This topic has 171 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I unconditionally withdraw anything that could be taken as disparaging against Eileen.You are very right Vin, we should not drag anybody else into this now the matter has been settled that no-one on this thread was aware of what was taking place that the Party could have been fore-warned But what is indeed missing on this thread is ex-Comrade Colborn response, defending not his politics which Robbo may be interested in hearing but to explain the manner of his departure from the Party which now involves expelling him unless he submits his resignation. He knew the rulebook but chose to flout it. He was approached to stand locally in the recent council elections as the SPGB candidate but he failed to reply to the e-mail. That was his opportunity to do the honourable thing and declare his intentions.You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.
alanjjohnstone wrote:I unconditionally withdraw anything that could be taken as disparaging against Eileen.You are very right Vin, we should not drag anybody else into this now the matter has been settled that no-one on this thread was aware of what was taking place that the Party could have been fore-warned But what is indeed missing on this thread is ex-Comrade Colborn response, defending not his politics which Robbo may be interested in hearing but to explain the manner of his departure from the Party which now involves expelling him unless he submits his resignation. He knew the rulebook but chose to flout it. He was approached to stand locally in the recent council elections as the SPGB candidate but he failed to reply to the e-mail. That was his opportunity to do the honourable thing and declare his intentions.You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.Alan, I think your withdrawal is correct and appropriate and that the point you raised was unworthy of you.No one in the NERB (other than Steve and presumably Eileen) was aware of Steve's intention. I was in contact with Vin after the May Day event in Newcastle, re activity in the North East, and at that time we were both under the impression that Steve Colborn was intending to remain a member of the NERB. Whilst I accept that Steve may not have wanted to have contact with Vin, I do think he should have done the honourable thing and let the Party know of his intentions before standing for another political party.Whilst accepting Robbo's point about being on residents' committees or involved in things like school governerships, etc. I think there is a massive difference between that and taking an elected post on a council (even if it is a Parsih Council) under the banner of a registered political party, even if they do seem to have an over riding interest in matters relating to dog turds and the British Legion.
Vin wrote:May I respectfully request that admin/mod locks this thread as it can lead to nothing positive.Sorry about that, I forgot it was the 'local elections' thread
alanjjohnstone wrote:You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.I agree cde Colborn should have resigned before standing for another political party but our aim should be to win him and others like him back to the party. and that includes Labour members and members of the Seaham Community Party. Our aim is to attract a majority of the worldIt does not help the party or our case for world cooperation to appear bitter, vindictive and unforgiving and will certainly not result in Form As from Seaham. Especially, if they find out how nasty and negative we can be against local community organisatons and ex members.This is how it will appear to observers. The branch should simply ask for an expanation and his voluntary resignation. He knows the rules.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:even if they do seem to have an over riding interest in matters relating to dog turds and the British Legion.See ya ve nivva stud in dog shite for ages marra. Or yud be mare simpatheticA nar thes nee shite on yor side of the rivva
Vin wrote:Tim Kilgallon wrote:even if they do seem to have an over riding interest in matters relating to dog turds and the British Legion.See ya ve nivva stud in dog shite for ages marra. Or yud be mare simpatheticA nar thes nee shite on yor side of the rivva
Whey man marra, aal wor dergs knaa who t'gan t'the netty.on tha airn
Vin wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:You may have 40 years of personal comradeship with ex-Cde Colborn, Vin. I do not. I am under no obligation to show similar restraint as yourself in regards to this embarrassing affair.I agree cde Colborn should have resigned before standing for another political party but our aim should be to win him and others like him back to the party. and that includes Labour members and members of the Seaham Community Party. Our aim is to attract a majority of the worldIt does not help the party or our case for world cooperation to appear bitter, vindictive and unforgiving and will certainly not result in Form As from Seaham. Especially, if they find out how nasty and negative we can be against local community organisatons and ex members.This is how it will appear to observers. The branch should simply ask for an expanation and his voluntary resignation. He knows the rules.
Well when founding members EJB Allen and TA Jackson joined other parties, Jack Fitzgerald held public debates against them. In the case of EJB Allen, there were at least two debates.However, whilst not making it personal, when SPGB members join other parties (never mind standing as candidates) if indeed that is the case here, then they should be expelled, voluntarily or otherwise. That doesn't mean we need to operate Stasi methods of informing on other members who might possibly have known.
There is an interesting side to this. Assuming that Steve Colborn is still a Socialist and still committed to the interests of the working class which I can't imagine he's not (even if he has forfeited his right to remain a member of our Party), he could be an experiment as to how a Socialist MP or councillor might behave. So it will be interesting to follow his interventions in the Town Council's deliberations. We could even start a thread on "Councillor Colborn's interventions" based on reports in the local media. I think I will.
ALB wrote:There is an interesting side to this. Assuming that Steve Colborn is still a Socialist and still committed to the interests of the working class which I can't imagine he's not (even if he has forfeited his right to remain a member of our Party), he could be an experiment as to how a Socialist MP or councillor might behave. So it will be interesting to follow his interventions in the Town Council's deliberations. We could even start a thread on "Councillor Colborn's interventions" based on reports in the local media. I think I will.Yes Adam it is important that we monitor this massive development in revolutionary politics.I think the transformation of Seaham into a tourist trap on par with Waikiki Beach, Venice or the Seychelles, aided by Steve Colborn's transitional demands for the removal of a couple of dozen dog turds, may well prove to be a the crucial breakthrough workers need in the journey to overthrow capitalist oligarchy.Vladimir Lenin, Mao Tse Tung, Fidel Castro, eat you hearts out, the new vanguard leader has arrived, Steve Colborn.Oh sorry the Seaham Community Party already has a leader, a guy named Barry Taylor, Steve must be following him!
gnome wrote:Since that question has yet to be answered I'll ask it again.The Executive Committee was made aware of this development towards the end of its meeting yesterday but decided to wait for a response from other members of NE Branch.I am not a member of NERB but I would not like the EC to act on misinformation and rumour (not that it ever has ) so I will be clarifying my position in an email to the June EC. For those members that are aware of my long association with Seaham I will reproduce it here:I moved to Sunderland from Seaham in 2000 and my contact with Steve has mostly been via forum and email. I last spoke with him at the acrimonious online NERB meeting of 15th August 2016 and he has not replied to my emails since.I do not read the local rags so the first time I heard about Seaham Community Party was in a Facebook post on 6th May. My response was to post it on our forum the same day. I did not try to contact Steve as he had not previously replied to my emails.I am baffledYFS
E-mail the EC as you wish, but we're not the Stasi, members aren't guilty by association with members who join other parties.
jondwhite wrote:E-mail the EC as you wish, but we're not the Stasi, members aren't guilty by association with members who join other parties.Thanks, and I agree, but members will wonder 'he must have known…….' My past experience is that this sort of thing can get out of all proportions, unless nipped in the budI am not, nor have I ever been a member of the Seaham Community Party.
Vin wrote:The party has a long history in Seaham in the North East of England and it seems we have an elected SPGBr at the local elections there, polling more votes than a Labour candidatehttp://www.durham.gov.uk/article/12696/Parish-council-4-May-2017-election-results#Deneside Ward of Seaham ParishFound this explanation of Councillor Colborn's action on the Seaham Community Party's Facebook page from April last year (so it had been long planned without telling us):
Quote:Steven Colborn Good to finally get on this page. Don't usually do face book, prefer doing debates and public meetings but they don't seem to happen nowadays, so needs must, as they say!LikeShow More Reactions· Reply · 2· 12 April at 18:30Paul Jorgenson Thought you used to stand in elections for the socialist party, curious why the change.Like· Reply · 1· 24 April at 08:28Greg Bewick He is with the National Socialists now 24 April at 08:56Steven Colborn I had a conversation with Barry Taylor and we discussed the merits/demerits of the situation, as it pertains to "Seaham" and what was needed for its population. It is fine to have a long term goal of changing society, for the betterment of everyone but it was/is (as I considered it) and probably most people do as well, an aim for the future.The ethos of the SCP is something that can be achieved, now! There are aims, within the sphere that the SCP operates, that I feel my background can help. After all, 5 years as a Tenant board member of East Durham Homes, 36 years immersed in the political arena and a Degree in Politics/Sociology as well as, over the years, assisting various people in their efforts to navigate the convoluted mess that passes for civilisation, has afforded me perspectives that I feel can be useful.Other than that, at 55 years old, with a progressively debilitating neurological illness, I may not have that much more time to contribute to a town/people that I hold dear!As with everything else I have done, it is not about the pecuniary benefits for myself (I feel councillors should be unpaid, as was the case years ago) but about can "I" make a difference! I feel I can.That, in essence, is why I have done, what I have done! No change whatsoever but a chance to do something good/worthwhile "now"!Like· Reply · 3· 24 April at 09:11Steven Colborn Greg Bewick Did you consider what you were typing, when you typed it Greg? The terms National/Socialist are mutually exclusive! (One cannot be one and also the other).Were you also aware that "National Socialists was/is a term forever linked to the German National Socialist Party of Hitler and his ilk, the NAZI party? Are you suggesting I am a NAZI?LikeShow More Reactions· Reply · 24 April at 09:31So we have been implicated and will need to say something at some point.
ALB wrote:So we have been implicated and will need to say something at some point.I think that was inevitable, ALB. I have still not heard from him and as it concerns my family I would prefer the branch or the EC dealt with it.
Immplicated in what, pray tell? "Socialist joins non-political group of local people to oppose a Labour Council, to concerned with themselves and their self-image, to care about the community"!That, in a nutshell, is what this is/was about. For your further information, it was April of "this" year, not 2016, so it had not "been long planned", with or without telling anyone!In point of fact, I was one of those who would have resigned, supposing we had made a clean sweep of all seats, thus reducing the Councils bill for councillors expenses by 10, those being the number that would have stood down.Furthermore, if Seaham Community Party had any political leaning, I would not have given my support. Their one interest is Seaham and whats best for us all. It was/is a chance to democratise a Council, insofar as anything can be democratic in this Capitalist shit hole of a world.After being tipped off about posts on the Forum, regarding myself, I thought I would peruse them myself! What I have read are comments that do no service to those that have made them.No one on this forum has the right to question my Socialist credentials, no one. Nor from the Party at large. I am as much a Socialist now, as I was 36 years ago when I first joined The Party. I still put the case for Socialism at every possible oppurtunity, wheresoever I find myself.I am still the same Socialist who has written thousands of letters to the press, talked for hundreds of hours on local radio phone in programmes and assisted in delivering 10's of thousands of leaflets/manifestos over the years, as well as contesting elections on our behalf a couple of dozen times at least.If I had been involved with the initial setting up of the SCP (Seaham Community Party), I would have urged that they name change to the Seaham Community Action Group, but the action had already been taken on the name.I am not trying to say that all in the SCP are buddiong Socialists, they aren't but what they are, are ordinary folk, prepared to put their heads above the parapets and challenge the totally undemocratic Labour stranglehold on Seaham.If any of the above offends anyone, or if they cannot understand why I have done, what I have done, then know this, no one is more offended than myself, when I read the pathetic insults thrown my way!I have been on the "sharp end" of some insulting crap on here/spopen/spintcom in the past, but the recent comments take the biscuit.I am not a traitor, (how dare you call me that) to the case for Socialism. There is nothing contradictory in being a member of The Socialist Party and being involved in what is nothing more or less than a "local action group".If I had, (heaven forfend) joined Labour or SLP, even the Greens, the case would have been defenceless. As it is, I haven't and it is!!!At tomorrows EC meeting, I expect I will be charged with"action detrimental"! if I am, that will smell about as bad as the "revolutionary dog shite" Timothy Kilgallon enthuses over.Show the EC this post! Bring the charge, I will answer it but I have no intention of walking away from something I have given my entire adult life to (many times to the detriment of my own family), quietly.Yours Still Fraternally,Steve Colborn.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.