Respect break through in Leicester and Birmingham

by Ray Fri Jul 16, 2004 16:27

RESPECT came fourth. This was

- in two constituencies with a large Muslim population, where they'd got about 10% in last month's local and Euro elections

- in a bye-election, typically an event used by voters to send a message to the government. The Lib Dems had a swing towards them of 10%, not something that's likely to be repeated in a general election

- in the week when the Butler report came out, and Iraq - RESPECT's raison d'etre - was all over the news

- just after Marxism, an event that gathers SWP members from all over the UK, from where many were sent out canvassing.

This was about the most favourable set of circumstances RESPECT could hope for, and it came a distant fourth. Its all downhill from here.

by ReSect watch Fri Jul 16, 2004 16:34

This is what Yvonne Ridley had to say on being asked about elected reps receiving the average industrial wage:
I’ve heard that before and what I’ve said when it’s suggested I take a pay cut is: ‘Give me three or four times as much.’ The task of being an MP involves helping and listening to people, but to do the job properly you need a huge research team around you. It’s virtually impossible to fulfil all the functions I believe an MP should fulfil on the meagre Westminster wages. This may sound strange, but you just have to look at some of the American senators, who employ 50 or 60 people. They create jobs in research to find out what’s happening and keep them informed.

I am certainly dismayed by some MPs who staff their offices with spouses or close relatives. Yet the role of an MP is very much to keep abreast of local as well as world events. It’s very hard to do all of this on your own, and as a journalist I know how valuable research work is and how it has to be done correctly. As long as it wasn’t abused, I would love to see more resources and more money given to MPs to enable them to have research facilities on hand.

by Stephen Daedalus Fri Jul 16, 2004 16:36

Respect are campaigning on a muslim platform. So where the LibDems. The LibDem candidate even put Singh in his name in the leaflets that went to muslim areas and not non-muslim areas.

Respect is a coalition of a wide variety of strange forces. It's an alliance between the SWP, the Muslim Association of Britain and ex-Blair MP George Galloway. I fail to understand how the SWP can go into an unprincipled alliance with these forces if they are genuine. It's correct for socialists to orientate to working class people and towards minority groups that are falling victim to state oppression. It's also correct to phrase demands in a way accessable to radicalised working class muslims.

This is not what the SWP are doing. They are entering into an alliance with the MAB and give support to groups like the anti-gay People's Justice Party. Radicalised Muslim Youth that socialists should be orientating to do not necessarily support these policies. Imagine if the British SWP went to make an orientation to the Irish Community in Britain. Would they stand outside Catholic Churches on Sundays and enter into electoral pacts with conservative Irish Catholic Bishops? No they would not, Why then adopt this tactic to the Muslim community in Britain?

Since the formation of Respect we have seen the SWP vote against the inclusion of Gay Rights and Women's Rights in the manifesto. We have seen the SWP endorse giving 2nd preference votes to the Labour Party in the London Mayor election. We have seen the SWP vote against a workers' wage policy for any Respect elected reps. Surely these are essential prerequisites for any socialist entering into an electoral pact? Why are they not putting Women's rights, Gay Rights and a workers' wage policy to the fore? Somehow are muslims unable to support these basic demands?

So is it neccessarily a positive thing that Respect get a good vote? This will only lead to the proping up of right-wing conservative 'leaders' of the muslim community and will not lead to radicalised voters supporting Gay rights and Women's rights.

by Ray Fri Jul 16, 2004 16:45

"Respect are campaigning on a muslim platform. So where the LibDems. The LibDem candidate even put Singh in his name in the leaflets that went to muslim areas and not non-muslim areas. "

1. The Lib Dem candidate's name really was Something Singh Something. He (allegedly) dropped the Singh for white areas, not added it for Muslim areas.
2. Plus, if his name is/includes Singh, it doesn't mean he's a Muslim. It means he's a Sikh.

Perhaps you should stick to railing against Christianity?

by Stephen Daedalus Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:07

Ray, The LibDem candidate is a Sikh. I've no problem with that. The fact is that in certain areas he did or did not include Singh in his name. This is quite cynical.

It's interesing that Ray (a SWP member perhaps?) does not deal with the political questions I raise. Instead I get told to keep "railing" against religions. SWP members and socialists in general should be asking themselves is the Respect Project the correct way to orientate towards the anger that exists in minority communities? I am of the opinion that socialists should not enter into alliances with conservative forces in society. Again I'll pose the question: if the SWP were to orientate towards the 5 million strong Irish community in Britain on issues that are effecting them would they stand outside Catholic Churches on sundays, support Conservative and discredited Bishops, and drop all demands around womens' rights, gay rights and divorce? No they would not! Then why do that in Muslim communities? Why did the SWP vote against a workers' wage policy? Why did the SWP support 2nd preferences to the Labour London Mayor candidate?

Ray, please engage in a proper debate and answer these questions.

by Molly Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:15

Ray (a SWP member perhaps?)

What ignorance

by RayWatch Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:28

Ray is actually an Existentialist Dadaist. He is also a mime artist. You can catch his show, The Wise Sayings of Leon Trotsky, every Friday at 6 pm in Temple Bar Square.

by Ray Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:30

"It's interesing that Ray (a SWP member perhaps?) "

Stephen, Stephen, what would your poor mother say?

by curious Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:42

You display the same ignorance of British politics as you have done on other posts about Ireland. If you seriously beleive that being a Sikh is an advantage when trying to win votes off conservative muslims, you are even stupider than I know you are.

I reckon the SP is just jealous because the SWP have wiped their eye.

by Curious eile Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:50

"I reckon the SP is just jealous because the SWP have wiped their eye."

They wiped their eye, how? By running in an election and not getting someone elected?

by curious Fri Jul 16, 2004 17:53

There's not a constituency in Britain where the SP would get that kind of vote.

by Stephen Daedalus Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:09

Just the other day I was accused of being a member of the Labour Party! Please deal with my arguments and stop throwing up rubbish and slurs.

Is the Respect project the best way to go for socialists?

by Curious eile Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:11

Methink that Ray wouldn't think that any form of electoral socialism is the way to go forward. Although he seems a bit soft on the Shinners.

by Ray Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:18

Plus, you know us anarchists have always had a thing for bombs and guns.

(probably a low expectations thing. I don't take the Shinners' claims of socialism seriously, so I'm not let down)

by Stephen Daedalus Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:21

Look, could you please debate the topic. Indymedia is not some kind of coffee morning. Editors could you please delete irrelevant postings.

by C e Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:21

Don't you think?

by Spuppy watch Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:28

That the Spuppies have gone very quiet. Must be obeying RBB's orders. Good to see the special relationship is still going strong.

by curious Fri Jul 16, 2004 18:55

Well, you do use the same tiresome jargon. But perhaps I do you an injustice in which case I apologise.

by . Fri Jul 16, 2004 21:19

who is new labour london mayor candidate, livingstone?

by David C. Fri Jul 16, 2004 21:31

Labour should have lost TWO seats yesterday, not one.

If George Galloway et al had cared as much about visiting justice on the Blair warmongers as they did about stroking their own egos then they would have been working for a Lib Dem win in both constituencies. The votes they got WOULD HAVE COST BLAIR THE HODGE HILL SEAT.

-The extra 460 votes would have made labour's defeat absolute instead of partial.
-That defeat might have been the last straw that forced blair out of No. 10.
-Blair's departure might have crippled Bush in the US election in November.
- Which might have saved the world from a new dark age of anglo-american facism...

This is an exact parallel with the Ralph Nader fiasco in the US - some squirrelly little angry leftists decide that dragging off their 2.8% of the vote to their uncompromising cause is more important than helping to defeat an evil government in a close race. If the consequences weren't so serious then you could laugh at the stupid, self-important pretentious self-absorbed little runts. But the consequences are very serious.

Thank you, Respect - you've let Blair squeak through again. Well done. And be sure to run for every seat in the general election - no sense in letting Blair lose just because an overwhelming majority of voters hate him, is there?

Wankers.

by paul c Fri Jul 16, 2004 21:43

i don't know how you can blame respect for labour's win, why not blame the list of independents that went up, or the conservative candiate??

not that im a fan of respect


i reckon that more parties doing well in local and national governement in america would be key to progress in america, and the no not this time what till next time excuse is useless, they'll never de a good time for it according the democrats

by David C. Fri Jul 16, 2004 22:01

...they are supposedly a 'one cause' party, namely to punish the Blair warmongers for appeasing the Americans over Iraq - the precise outcome that they thwarted by running.

Like Ralph Nader, they ran for their leader's ego, not for results...

Shame on them...

by Bloom Fri Jul 16, 2004 22:04

Simple, they didn't get enough votes.
I suppose you could argue if everybody withdrew except the Labs and Lib Dems then the Lib Dems might have won. It's not obvious though.
More to the point the Lib Dems are scarcely a Left Wing party. Their anti war position is not consistnet and they accept privy councillor briefings which puts them firmly in the establishment. It would be a pity if there was not a credible left wing challenge.
In America both Republicans and Democrats support the war. Ralph Nader does not. Both support the PATRIOT Act, Nader not, etc. To reduce the question of a third party candidate to that of egos is to trivialise and encourage critics to row in with Democrat party of big business -- something that has been urged for years, which is partially why politics there are so depressing. If its correct to organise against the big business/imperialist duopoly the question arises: If not now when?

by David C. Fri Jul 16, 2004 22:20

Four more years of Bush and Blair.... Its a reasonable price to pay for enabling 1.83% of voters to make a statement, I suppose.

Wake up. The VAST majority of people on this planet hate Bush and Blair, but nonetheless they rule with absolute power based on stuff like 587 votes in Florida and 460 votes in Birmingham.

Democracy is about compromise - The only people who get 100% of what they want are those with total, ruthless power over others. Uncompromising self-absorbed egotists like Nader and Galloway basically vandalize our society. Shame on them and on anyone who votes for them...

by HV Fri Jul 16, 2004 23:35

A break-through is when people get elected.

by tallyho - Institute for Fourth Party Studies Sat Jul 17, 2004 02:09

Detailed results from key areas

London - 4.6%

Key Constituencies for the London Assembly
Votes % of votes
City and East
Labour 39,296 26.88
Conservative 22,710 15.53
Respect 21,795 14.91
LibDems 17,526 11.99
BNP 11,434 7.82
Ukip 12,800 8.76
Green 9,384 6.42

North East
Labour 38,958 27.95
LibDems 24,112 17.30
Conservative 23,283 16.71
Green 18,736 13.44
Respect 11,510 8.26
Ukip 9,389 6.74
BNP 5,538 3.97

Barnet and Camden
Conservative 45,751 32.09
Labour 34,967 24.53
LibDems 23,643 16.58
Green 13,982 9.81
Ukip 8,149 5.72
Respect 5,705 4.00
BNP 4,152 2.91

Enfield & Haringey
Labour 34,903 28.10
Conservative 31,240 25.15
LibDems 19,730 15.89
Green 11,470 9.24
Ukip 8,725 7.03
Respect 6,221 5.01
BNP 5,158 4.15

London Mayoral Election (first preferences)
Votes % of votes
Ken Livingstone Labour 685,541 35.70
Steve Norris Conservative 542,423 28.24
Simon Hughes LibDem 284,645 14.82
Frank Maloney Ukip 115,665 6.02
Lindsey German Respect 61,731 3.21
Julian Leppert BNP 58,405 3.04
Darren Johnson Green 57,331 2.99
Ram Gidoomal Christian Alliance 41,696 2.17
Lorna Reid IWCA 9,542 0.50
T Nagalingam Independent 6,692 0.35

Party List Votes
Votes % of votes
Conservative 533,696 27.84
Labour 468,247 24.43
LibDems 316,218 16.50
Green 160,445 8.37
Ukip 156,780 8.18
BNP 90,365 4.71
Respect 87,533 4.57


Birmingham - 7.31%

Across the City
Votes % of votes
Labour 74,778 27.63
Conservative 53,542 19.78
LibDems 49,370 18.24
Ukip 31,031 11.46
BNP 19,950 7.37
Respect 19,782 7.31
Green 12,261 4.53

Key Wards
Respect share of the vote (%)
Bordesley Green 38.6
Springfield 29.5
Washwood Heath 26.0
Sparkbrook 25.2
Nechells 22.6
Aston 18.3
Soho 12.2
Yardley 12.0
Lozells 8.2
Moseley & KH 7.8

Regions: London

Tower

Hamlets
Newham Hackney Waltham Forest
Number

of votes

Labour 10,103 18,078 14,253 13,555
Tory 9,523 6,924 5,866 11,126
LibDems 8,531 4,626 5,538 8,881
Ukip 4,195 4,370 2,338 7,308
Greens 4,194 2,876 6,837 5,506
Respect 10,611 11,784 4,026 5,468
BNP 2,362 2,414 825 2,741
Total 49,519 51,072 39,683 54,585
% of votes
Labour 19.39 32.84 34.20 23.65
Tory 18.28 12.58 14.07 19.41
LibDems 16.37 8.40 13.29 15.49
Ukip 8.05 7.94 5.61 12.75
Greens 8.05 5.22 16.40 9.61
Respect 20.36 21.41 9.66 9.54
BNP 4.53 4.39 1.98 4.78

Regions: Eastern Region

Luton Peterborough Watford
Number

of votes

Labour 10,077 8,290 4,436
Tory 7,841 14,013 5,299
LibDems 6,627 5,002 6,020
Ukip 6,324 7,091 3,137
Greens 1,432 1,705 1,636
Respect 2,347 2,119 560
BNP 1,826 2,342 813
Total 36,474 40,562 21,901
% of votes
Labour 25.96 18.34 18.85
Tory 20.20 31.00 22.51
LibDems 17.06 11.07 25.58
Ukip 16.29 15.69 13.33
Greens 3.69 3.78 6.95
Respect 6.05 4.69 2.38
BNP 4.70 5.18 3.45

Regions: West Midlands

Birmingham Sandwell Walsall
Number

of votes

Labour 74,778 27,527 15,764
Tory 53,542 13,064 17,259
LibDems 49,370 6,930 5,610
Ukip 31,031 10,734 13,224
Greens 12,262 2,745 2,081
Respect 19,782 2,671 2,755
BNP 19,950 9,976 7,418
Total 260,715 73,647 64,111
% of votes
Labour 27.63 35.63 23.25
Tory 19.78 16.91 25.46
LibDems 18.24 8.97 8.27
Ukip 11.46 13.89 19.50
Greens 4.53 3.55 3.07
Respect 7.31 3.45 4.06
BNP 7.37 12.91 10.94

Regions: Yorkshire and the Humber

Bradford Kirklees Leeds Sheffield
Number

of votes

Labour 34,373 31,138 59,707 51,330
Tory 43,447 29,954 51,827 23,344
LibDems 22,155 23,676 36,318 29,434
Ukip 18,679 17,743 29,595 21,436
Greens 8,705 9,147 13,950 11,725
Respect 8,875 5,953 3,967 3,887
BNP 15,925 17,144 15,048 13,029
Total 152,159 134,755 210,412 154,185
% of votes
Labour 22.00 22.44 27.46 32.28
Tory 27.81 21.62 23.83 14.67
LibDems 14.18 17.06 16.70 18.51
Ukip 11.95 12.79 13.61 13.48
Greens 5.57 6.59 6.41 7.37
Respect 5.68 4.29 1.82 2.44
BNP 10.19 12.35 6.92 8.19

Regions: East Midlands

Derby Nottingham Leicester
Number

of votes

Labour 21,070 18,755 22,061
Tory 14,989 13,206 14,873
LibDems 11,410 8,987 10,690
Ukip 19,326 15,935 15,252
Greens 3,216 4,681 4,802
Respect 2,505 2,343 7,375
BNP 4,697 4,793 4,858
Total 77,213 68,700 79,911
% of votes
Labour 26.99 26.55 26.08
Tory 19.20 18.70 17.58
LibDems 14.61 12.72 12.63
Ukip 24.76 22.56 18.03
Greens 4.12 6.62 5.67
Respect 3.20 3.31 8.71
BNP 6.01 6.78 5.74

Totals of the Regional Tables Above

Number

of votes

Labour 435,295
Tory 336,097
LibDems 249,805
Ukip 227,718
Greens 97,500
Respect 97,028
BNP 126,161
Total 1,569,604

Some Key Votes Across the Country

Preston
Council elections in five wards
% of votes
Labour 39.9
Respect 29.8
Conservative 21.6
LibDems 8.7

Bradford
% of votes
Conservative 27.81
Labour 22.00
LibDems 14.18
Ukip 11.95
BNP 10.19
Respect 5.68
Green 5.57

Leicester
% of votes
Labour 26.08
Ukip 18.03
Conservative 17.58
LibDems 12.63
Respect 8.71
BNP 5.74
Green 5.67

Luton
% of votes
Labour 25.96
Conservative 20.20
LibDems 17.06
Ukip 16.29
Respect 6.05
BNP 4.70
Green 3.69

Slough
% of votes
Labour 33.02
Conservative 19.16
Ukip 13.70
LibDems 11.74
Respect 5.75
Green 5.62
BNP 3.84

by MEDIA BLACKOUT - PROPOGANDA MODEL Sat Jul 17, 2004 02:24

UKIP as the story last time- but I didnt hear anything about Respect. Despite some interesting votes. For example, this extract from the full article below-

Never before in Britain has the left achieved such a high vote as it did on 10 June. Over a quarter of a million votes for Respect, and another 60,000-plus for the Scottish Socialist Party, beats all previous comparisons. The Communist Party vote in 1945 stood at 102,780, which allowed the party to win two MPs. The combined left vote of 180,000-plus at the 2001 general election was against the background of a much higher turnout than in the European elections.



Mayoral candidate Lindsey German assesses the impact of the vote.

The centre cannot hold; things fall apart. That's the only conclusion to be drawn from Britain's 'Super Thursday' on 10 June, when right wing minority parties achieved high votes, but the left also put itself on the map and in some areas achieved astonishing gains.

Across Europe ruling parties were punished for their policies by millions of electors. Hope when the left and social democrat parties were swept to office only a few short years ago has turned to despair. Gerhard Schröder, the head of Germany's Social Democrat and Green government, was hammered for his cuts in Germany's welfare system which are making everyone from pensioners to school students squeal.

In Britain there is no enthusiasm for a return to Tory government - they show little sign of being able to win the next election. But there is bitterness and resentment against Tony Blair's New Labour government from many quarters. Meanwhile minority parties of both right and left scored record votes as a result of this disenchantment.

The election proved a disaster for the main parties. Labour's vote was at its lowest since 1918, with voters in the core Labour areas deserting them in droves. Labour lost council seats in its heartlands, with the Lib Dems taking control of councils such as Newcastle in the north east - home to many New Labour MPs. The Iraq war was the main issue that broke Labour voters. However, the failure of the government to deliver on everything from free education to pensions also helped to ensure that Tony Blair will go down in the history books as the Labour prime minister who threw away so much goodwill so carelessly and so irrevocably.

The big story of the night in the Euro elections was the rise of Ukip, the right wing populist Little England party, which harnessed discontent over the remoteness and bureaucracy of the EU but also expressed its feelings in raw populist terms about immigrants and asylum seekers. It did, however, certainly in London, express ordinary Londoners' concerns about issues like public transport, and clearly attracted the votes of substantial numbers of people who don't consider themselves racists.

Michael Howard was the big loser from Ukip's rise, as the Tories' voter base was split. But it is estimated that 20 percent of Ukip's votes come from former Labour voters.

The fascist BNP failed to make its widely trumpeted breakthrough and didn't win a single European seat. It also failed to hang on to many of its previous local election gains, although it did win a handful of seats in Bradford and in Epping, just outside London. Its failure combined three things - the rise of Ukip took votes from it, the tactic of inviting Jean-Marie Le Pen to address it backfired, partly because of the protests it engendered, and there was a successful anti-fascist campaign in the form of Unite Against Fascism.

Nonetheless the BNP votes are still much too high in some areas, and there is a major job to do to undercut it in the next few years.

That's where the left comes in. Because it is no good simply campaigning against the BNP - important though that is. We also have to present a credible alternative, something positive for people to vote for. And on 10 June we made a start.

Never before in Britain has the left achieved such a high vote as it did on 10 June. Over a quarter of a million votes for Respect, and another 60,000-plus for the Scottish Socialist Party, beats all previous comparisons. The Communist Party vote in 1945 stood at 102,780, which allowed the party to win two MPs. The combined left vote of 180,000-plus at the 2001 general election was against the background of a much higher turnout than in the European elections.

In London, where we made our strongest showing, I came fifth as mayor, beating the BNP and the Greens, despite being excluded from many hustings, and gaining virtually no publicity in the London press and news media. Our list gained 87,000 votes, and at 4.6 percent was just short of gaining us an assembly seat. And George Galloway polled just less than 5 percent in the European elections, following a campaign of media blackout.

The only exception to this blackout was when two national newspapers devoted editorials to urging their readers not to vote Respect, and when the bombing brigade of pro-war columnists turned their attention to attacking Respect.

While nearly one in 20 voters supported Respect in London, that hid some much greater percentages. In Tower Hamlets George Galloway topped the poll for the Euro elections, and across the board in east London Respect did spectacularly well. North East London was also a major success, and we chalked up good votes in areas like Haringey and Redbridge.

Indeed, if the votes are aggregated for the four London boroughs of Newham, Tower Hamlets, Waltham Forest and Hackney, then Respect comes third of all parties. While Labour has 27.51 percent of this vote, the Tories have 16.41, Respect 15.67, the Lib Dems 13.55, and Greens 9.54.

And while the results in the Euro elections outside London were lower overall - reflecting the political unevenness of the huge Euro constituencies - there were some remarkable results there. A vote of 2.4 percent across the West Midlands constituency translated into 7.4 percent across the whole of Birmingham, 3.4 percent in nearby Sandwell and 4 percent in Walsall. In the East Midlands Respect gained 9 percent across the whole of Leicester and over 3 percent each in Nottingham and Derby. In Luton Respect picked up 6 percent of the vote, in Peterborough 4.6 percent, in Bradford 5.6 percent and Kirklees 4.2 percent.

Where did this vote come from? Some on the sectarian left dismiss it as a 'Muslim vote' (as if Muslim votes were somehow less than anyone else's). Certainly in some areas we did win significant numbers of Muslims, but even in these areas more Muslims will have voted for the main parties - or not voted at all - than voted for Respect. Muslims in Britain have been increasingly politicised, and that has accelerated in recent years following 11 September 2001. The wars on Afghanistan and Iraq, the continuing question of Palestine, the terrorism laws and the rise of Islamophobia have alienated many from Labour and led them to look for an alternative.

But many Muslims are also working class and poor, with some of the worst housing, schools and job conditions. They care about their children's future, about their parents' old age, about what is happening to society. They therefore supported us on these issues as well.

We also galvanised an increasing share of the trade union left, the anti-war movement and socialists. A small minority took a highly sectarian attitude to Respect - some even voting for the war party, Labour, rather than us, others spoiling their ballot papers in a totally futile and unnoticed gesture in the welter of spoilt ballot papers that this election produced. But many other socialists, some former members of left groups or the Communist Party, joined in enthusiastically. There was wide support from firefighters and tube and rail workers in London, and from students, pensioners and ethnic minorities.

Many of these people might not have voted at all. Some of them still couldn't because they weren't registered but will do so next time. All of them did so with an enthusiasm missing from most mainstream politics.

If we add together the left vote with that of the Greens, then that to the left of Labour was remarkable. While the Greens scored much higher than Respect in this election, their overall performance fell well below their expectations. In London they lost votes across the city, and failed to get one of their three Assembly members re-elected. Darren Johnson, their mayoral candidate, who was projected in hustings and the media as the fourth candidate (getting often as much space in London's Evening Standard as the three main parties) came seventh after Ukip, Respect and the BNP. While they hung on to their two MEPs, they failed to gain a single extra one despite confident predictions of five or six.

Respect tried to get united platforms with the Greens before the elections but failed to convince the party's leadership that this could be done. It is a terrible shame, because now we would be looking at several more elected representatives (especially because united campaigns tend to attract more than the sum of their parts) and a left of Labour vote which would be as great as or greater than the right in some areas. We should not allow this to happen again, especially in the face of a rise of the right.

The Greens are long established and obviously have disagreements over aspects of Respect's policies. But Respect has a reach, especially in some inner cities, which the Greens do not have - to ethnic minorities, trade unions and sections of the anti-war movement. And we agree on 80 percent of policies. There should be the maximum effort to discuss how we can cooperate, how we can if possible avoid standing against one another in future elections, whether we can come closer together. Many voters for both organisations will expect no less in the coming months.

These are discussions which have to take place. Meanwhile, the mood of Respect members is high. We have made an impact against all the odds. Our task now is to branch out, to sink roots in different ethnic groups (as we have begun to do with the Turks and Kurds in north London), and to gain more substantial union support. That is on the cards with the RMT and the FBU, whose union conference voted to disaffiliate from Labour, but it is also being discussed in unions such as the CWU.

Most urgent is building and extending Respect as a grassroots organisation in every locality, with political, social and cultural events which can help us extend our support in the run-up to the general election, probably to be held next year. We cannot adopt the old left method of waiting for Respect's supporters to come to our meetings - we need to go to them.

Our first test will be the council and parliamentary by-elections in Leicester, Birmingham and east London over the summer. Pro-war columnist David Aaronovitch gave us a year before we fell apart. Given his record on weapons of mass destruction and bringing liberation for the Iraqi people, we can predict a long and healthy life.

by Stephen Daedalus Sat Jul 17, 2004 15:07

David C states on this thread that Respect running won a seat for Labour. This is a very incorrect analysis of the Liberal Democrats. The same argument is against Ralph Nader running in the US Presidential elections.

The LibDems in the UK are no different to Labour and the Tories. They may have a slightly different position on the war. (btw they back war with UN backing!) But so what! They still support cuts in public services, they opposed the Firefighters in their strike, they run many councils around the UK and implement the same vicious policies as Labour or the Tories. Although I am a critic of the Respect project, I will say that they were anti-establishment and did raise such ideas in the election.

In the USA Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards do not offer anything better. They both oppose gay civil union, they both voted for the war on Iraq, they are both career politicians that have never been progressive for the left in the US in all their time as Senators. If elected Kerry and Edwards will not mean a whole lot of difference to Americans living in poverty or without health cover. They will make no difference to Iraqi people that will continue to suffer US occupation. I support Nader for President, he is raising alternative ideas. He does oppose corporate rule and wants to withdraw from Iraq, he is also supportive of minority rights.

The key task is to build a genuine alternative to rotten right-wing politics. You wont get that by backing LibDems in the UK, Labour in Ireland or Kerry/Edwards in the USA.

Bush and Blair for 4 more years? Will our new champions of 'the alternative' Sen John Kerry and Michael Howard MP be any different?

by f Sat Jul 17, 2004 16:16

"These are quite extraordinary results by any standards. It is without precedent in recent political history for a minor party to do so well in two simultaneous by-elections and this was in the face of the mobilisation of the political machines of all three of the major parties."

This is a small bit of an exaggeration. There are plenty of examples in British electoral history of small parties consistantly winning seats and coming in 2nd in general and by-elections. For just one example look at the results of Scottish Militant Labour in the late 80s and early 90s.

The reality is that in Britain the 3 main parties are completely discredited and distrusted by working people. Recent polls carried out by the BBC have highlighted this. In this poll,
Only 17% thought the Conservatives would 'keep their promises', 21% thought Labour would and 18% for Lib Dems, 49% thought none of these parties can be trusted to keeps its promises. 54% believed the Tories were 'out of touch with ordinary people' and 51% believed Labour were. When people were asked who 'couold be trusted to run the NHS', 23% said the Tories could, 34% trusted Labour and 22% the Lib Dems, 29% said none of the 3 parties could be trusted. There is clearly a huge vacuum in British politics that is not being filled. One must view the RESPECT results in that context. One has to ask are RESPECT capable of really representing the interests of working class people that are completely disillusioned with the Labour party and the other 2 main parties. I don't believe RESPECT are capable of really being able to appeal the mas of working class people because of their opurtunistic panderings to Islamic clerics.

by f Sat Jul 17, 2004 16:32

"There's not a constituency in Britain where the SP would get that kind of vote."

That's untrue. In the city of Coventry in the recent local elections the SP took 12% of the overall vote. With any kind of PR electoral system the SP would probably win a seat in Westminster in Coventry

Elsewhere in those elections the SP got very good votes for example in Ryan Hayward in Lincoln achieved 16%, in Deptford the SP polled 13%, Steve Pugh in Stoke gained 12% and Alec Thraves in Swansea gained 10%

The SP candidates had the best results on the left in Merseyside, receiving 23% of the vote in Sefton’s Netherton and Orrel ward.

The fact is that there is a huge vacuum on the left in British politics, a party that stands with socialist policies can get very good electoral results.

by Tallyman Sat Jul 17, 2004 17:35

Leicester South
Parmjit Singh Gill (LD) 10,274 (34.94%)
Sir Peter Soulsby (Lab) 8,620 (29.31%)
Chris Heaton-Harris (C) 5,796 (19.71%)
Yvonne Ridley (Respect) 3,724 (12.66%)
David Roberts (Soc Lab) 263 (0.89%)
RU Seerious (Loony) 225 (0.77%)
Patrick Kennedy (Save Our Schools) 204 (0.69%)
Paul Lord (Ind) 186 (0.63%)
Mark Benson (Ind) 55 (0.19%)
Jiten Bardwaj (Ind) 36 (0.12%)
Alan Barrett (Ind) 25 (0.09%)

Birmingham Hodge Hill
Byrne (Lab) 7,451 (36.45%)
Davies (LD) 6,991 (34.20%)
Eyre (C) 3,543 (17.33%)
John Rees (Respect) 1,282 (6.27%)
James Starkey (NF) 805 (3.94%)
Mark Wheatley (Eng Dem) 277 (1.36%)
James Hargreaves (OCV) 90 (0.44%)

by Conor - SAucd Mon Jul 19, 2004 17:38

R E S P E C T is a farce.

Galloway is a charlatan, and an embarrasment to the movement.

The SWP has dropped the "socialist" part of their ethos by abandoning secularism. Any articles by respect representatives have been shoddy, poorly thought out affairs.

How long till the Irish SWP snuggle in under the british SWP in this RESPECT too?

What blair did to labour, Respect has done to the SWP.

by Stephen Daedalus Mon Jul 19, 2004 20:58

It will be interesting if any SWP members in Ireland criticise the Respect project. However I think that Ridley's reasonable election result will silence many critics in the British or Irish SWP. Does anyone know of any SWP members being at odds with Respect? I've not really spoken to many members of the SWP since the election when they knocked on my door.

by SPwatch Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:01

"That's untrue. In the city of Coventry in the recent local elections the SP took 12% of the overall vote. With any kind of PR electoral system the SP would probably win a seat in Westminster in Coventry"

Actually the SP lost a council seat in Coventry - to Labour! With Labour losing hundreds of seats all over England and Wales the SP did the impossible - managing to lose a seat to Labour. This labour gain in a Working Class Ward should cause the SP to reflect upon the situation. Instead they spin and peddle downright lies.

by Tallyman Tue Jul 20, 2004 15:37

I'm sure if you ask any SP members they will be disappointed to loose one of the 3 seats they held in that ward. It was only by a tiny margin. It was always going to be difficult for the SP to hold all 3 seats in that ward. I think that "f" can say that if the system of multi-seat PRSTV existed in westminster elections then the SP would probably win a seat in coventry. Just look at the results!

The point that was made was that Respect are claiming some kind of historic breakthrough in Leicester for a 4th party. This is just blatently wrong. Throughout British electoral history new parties and small parties have won seats and have beaten the main 3 parties in elections. It's a good vote for Respect in Leicester, but not an historic breakthrough!

by SPwatch Tue Jul 20, 2004 16:05

"I'm sure if you ask any SP members they will be disappointed to loose one of the 3 seats they held in that ward."

I am sure they would!

" It was always going to be difficult for the SP to hold all 3 seats in that ward. "

But this was in the middle of a massive swing against Labour. Surely it is rather strange in those circumstances that the SP should lose a seat to Labour.

"I think that "f" can say that if the system of multi-seat PRSTV existed in westminster elections then the SP would probably win a seat in coventry."

Highly unlikely given that the SP lost a Council seat when there was a massive swing against Labour. The SP have a middling vote in one constituency and a not so bad one in the adjoining constituency this does not hold through the entire region.

In 2001 Nellist got 2,638, 7.1% in Coventry NE, Windsor, SP(SA) got 1,475, 3.7% in Coventry Sth. This goes nowhere near getting a seat by any sort of PR. The SP(SA) may have done better than this in some areas of Coventry in the Council elections but only the self deluded would say that the SP could win a Westminster seat after they lost a council seat in circumstances where they should have had bo trouble in trouncing Labour.

by moonwolf Wed Jul 21, 2004 00:01

Given the make up of respect (conservative Islam)can we assume that an irish version would consist of a SWP/Opus Dei alliance?
Interesting also that while the SWP UK is aligning with a Conservative Islam Organisation the SWP in Ireland continually attempts (through it's domination of IAWM) to block out Anarchist Christian involvement, to the point of pretending that Shannon Pitstop Ploughshares don't exist! and it's glorious leader RBB refers to members of Christian Anarchist groups as "Goddist". Very confusing, christians are goddist but muslims are not? somewhat discriminatory, Eh RBB?

by Joeboy Wed Jul 21, 2004 00:02

Black revolutionary against racism
or
anti abortion women hating seperatist?

by Conor - SAucd Wed Jul 21, 2004 19:30

My personal views on MalcolmX are totally irrelevant to a discussion on RESPECT, and my opinion on the SWPs involvement.

What’s your views on using analogies as tools to steer discussion toward pointless asides, and away from objective analysis JoeBoy?

And while you’re at it, could you explain to me why the IST refuse to politically align themselves with other socialist groups (the CWI for example) , choosing instead to drop the nasty “socialist” tag 10years after Blair, and forming a coalition with the religious.

First they embrace sugar candy mountain, what next – the profit motive?

The Respect coalition is a reactionary grouping. The MAB is a Conservative group, for a start, check out the “homosexuality is a sexual perversion” policy, and follow it up by reading their website. Galloway met Tariq Aziz while he oversaw a torturous government, insists Castro “is not a dictator”, and has generally discredited the left with his pro Saddam rethoric.

Whats the Irish SWPs position on RESPECT ? I even find myself in agreement with David Aaronovitch on this issue (shudder)

On the respect website, their Tribute to Paul Foot leads with a description of him as “a man who believed in socialism”. I thought Socialist activism resulted from critical analysis, not blind faith. Its funny how 1 line in 1 article on 1 website can describe all the problems of an organisation that could offer so much to the movement.

by boris Thu Jul 22, 2004 04:14

RESPECT’S national executive met on Saturday to plan a strategy for building on the by-election successes in Leicester and Birmingham.

Here are some of the activities they are suggesting.

All those who have joined or supported Respect need to be contacted immediately and told about how well Respect did in the two by-elections. This should happen across the country, not just in Leicester and Birmingham.

Respect branches should be built in local areas by developing existing networks and tapping into new ones.

Respect will be gearing up for a probable general election next year, as well as targeting wards for next year’s council elections and looking at any by-elections that come up.

Imaginative ways of bring people together should be explored, such as picnics, cultural events, film showings, and regular newsletters to keep people in touch.

Those who support Respect need to become members, as the organisation depends on the financial contribution of its members.

Three Respect executive members, George Galloway, John Rees and Salma Yaqoob, outlined this strategy at the final rally of Marxism 2004 on Friday of last week.

George Galloway said, “Lenin said there are decades when nothing happens and weeks when decades happen. What a transformation of the political landscape we have seen in the last few weeks and months.

“The Liberal Democrats have been saying we cost them the Hodge Hill by-election. We owe the Liberals Democrats nothing.

“People in Leicester and Birmingham voted a year ago last May to sweep New Labour out of their council chambers. But they woke up to find the Liberal Democrats had got into bed with the Tories, and were closing schools and sacking workers.

“I have been in politics for 36 years, but their campaign still took my breath away with its hypocrisy—they issued a leaflet with black faces for one street and white faces for the street next door.

“We didn’t get involved in politics to help other parties, to try and choose between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. We are in politics because we believe in something.

“The council by-election in east London on 29 July is a real opportunity. We can turn the Ocean Estate into a tidal wave of opposition to New Labour.

“We need to reach more people, like the pensioners who are the poorest in the Western world living in the fourth richest country in the world.

“We are winning support from trade union branches, and we need to do more to win the hearts of those who make the wealth and provide the services. And we need to multiply the membership of Respect.

“At the general election we will be a dagger at the heart of those New Labour MPs who have betrayed us so often for so long.”

John Rees, the candidate in Birmingham Hodge Hill, said, “The campaign by the established parties was as low as you could go. They couldn’t stop talking about teenage yobs and asylum seekers, but they didn’t have anything to say about the war, or about the 1,000 job losses at Alstom.

“We have to win people’s trust. We have a lot still to do.

“The anti-war movement was a huge achievement. But it just skimmed the surface of the lives of the 60,000 people living in Hodge Hill.

“The core of the movement—those in the RMT, the FBU, the CWU and civil servants—are fed up and bitter, and they have a palpable desire for a new political force.

“There is no more important task for us than to build it.”

Salma Yaqoob said, “We are the activists. Any change, any progress, has been won by the activity of people like us. The Tories, Labour, the Lib Dems—what choice did they offer us? For two long we have been blackmailed into backing the least bad option. We have a huge responsibility to be effective, strategic and organised. We have to tap into the networks. Who do you know in each street, workplace, mosque, temple, church or community centre? Do you know them well enough to invite them round to your house? Ordinary people are used to politicians promising them things. But when they know you, they trust you. Already, we have achieved things beyond our wildest dreams.”

by chris daedalus Thu Jul 22, 2004 16:18

The funniest thing about the Leicester result was the total humiliation of the SP. They had backed Pat Kennedy, standing as an independent but on behalf of a small local campaign to save the special schools. This they proclaimed was the genuine working class candidate and Respect should stand down for him. Actually their vote was pathetic and beaten both by Dave Roberts of the SLP and R U Seerious of the Monster Raving Loony Party.

by SP watch Thu Jul 22, 2004 20:09

In reference to the SP backing this independent candidate as opposed to the Respect candidate, here is the article from SP newspaper, The Socialist

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/2004/355/index.html?id=np3.htm

by Conor - SAucd Fri Jul 23, 2004 14:52

Well?