A new left alternative: ATGWU Open Conference

by FG Thu Jun 01, 2006 00:47

That '10th June' in the middle is wrong. All dates throughout should read 17th June. Sorry!

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:41

This is a very good move forward and a great opportunity on the basis of a frank and open debate to begin developing a plan of action(s) over the coming period...out of which a strategy and a programme can grow. Well done Des, well done the ATGWU for hosting and promoting this effort.

During the last meeting of this Alliance, the issues brought up ranged from health to education to work related struggles and Aer Lingus. Rossport was also raised linked to the whole question of an energy policy. These are burning issues for all of us and matters that will determine the type of country we, and our children, will live in over the next few years. The incoherence and downright incompetence of the present coalition, coupled with their lying and deceit [see the debate over the last couple of days re:the Supreme Court] are creating a climate where clear positions on these matters have an audience, have an echo amongst our people. And the LP/FG number is not necessarily benefitting big time.
We haven't been told yet how the day of the Conference will be structured - can we, however, from the IAWM suggest that there are two further key issues that must be included in the agenda and the debate:
(i) The issue of the growing influx of labour into Ireland and the questions that this new situation engenders - questions that were key in the Irish Ferries mobilisation but also elements of racism and xenophobia that surfaced 'unexpectedly' in the media and locally around the recent hunger strike/protest of the 44 Afghani comrades.
(ii) The linked issue of the war and the support of the Government to the Empire's war effort...as the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq is deteriorating daily, and as the Crusaders are seriously considering attacking Iran, sometime before the US elections next November, these two issues, immigration/racism/jobs and the war will be with us for the foresseable future.
Can they be, should they not be included in the debate? And will it be possible to use Indymedia as a tool of discussion/debate preparing for June 17th?

Solidarity

Michael

by Curious Thu Jun 01, 2006 13:00

"During the last meeting of this Alliance,"

I thought this was a meeting launching an initiative. There's been other meetings?

by MichaelY - iawm Thu Jun 01, 2006 13:30

Yes, there was a meeting of the CIL in the Teachers Club on Tuesday April 4th. Good meeting with 3-4 speakers and about 50-60 activists present. It was there that DB of the ATGWU announced that he and his Union would like to support a proper Conference as a launching pad.

by Socialist Thu Jun 01, 2006 13:44

Re: the first post, are the Labour Party considered 'on the left' with regard to this initiative?

by Colm Breathnach - ISN personal capacity Thu Jun 01, 2006 14:40

Just to clarify, because there seems to be genuine confusion about who's organising what. This, initiative, which of course is a welcome development, has been taken solely by the ATGWU. The CIL has been invited to the conference but are not the convenors or organisers of the conference. The public meeting Michael referred to was organised by the CIL and Des Bonass did anounce the ATGWU initiative from the floor at the meeting but this was not the first meeting of an 'Alliance'.

The CIL is a specific alliance of three organisations, including the ISN, and a number of independents, campaigning for the creation of a new party of the working class. This, of course, does not preclude wider cooperation and I hope that the ATGWU conference will make a positive contribution to the debate on left cooperation and representation of the working class.

by hs - sp (personal capacity) Thu Jun 01, 2006 15:24

Hopefully there'll be a big turnout and we can start to discuss what there is and isn't in common between different organisations and groups, as well as a general political outlook to see the viability of a new left alliance or campaign. For myself personally, any left alliance that moves beyond a simple electoral list should have strong federated branches with real input from the membership and/or platforms within any alliance. No more secretive steering committees!!

by Pixilated - none Thu Jun 01, 2006 22:18

Now let me get this straight.

The CIL, an alliance of the ISN (not a party but an organisation), CWAG (a group not a party), Seamas Healy (a TD not a party) etc., are in favour of an alliance but really want to build a new party, but not quite yet. The Socialist Party, who dont want an alliance with anyone, are in favour of a new party, even though they are a party, but not just yet, in fact a good bit more 'not just yet' than the CIL. The People Before Profit is an alliance that really, really wants an alliance with the CIL, SP, Labour dissidents, Attila the Hun etc. etc. but dont want a party, because its really the SWP in disguise and they are a party so they dont want to be a party inside a party. The CIL, SP, Attila etc. wont go near any alliance with the SWP cos they've been at that party before and it ended up in a bad hangover.

Clear? As mud!

by KJ Thu Jun 01, 2006 23:04

Actually, Pixilated, that's a very accurate summation of where things are at! Not bad.

The bit you missed out is that a lot of this stuff has the 2007 election in mind. Will these 'alliances' still be around afterwards? One wonders.

by hack Thu Jun 01, 2006 23:23

The ISN want a new type of left party, the others in the cil are ex socialist party members who are looking for a home. The socialist party want a new social democratic party they can be a faction in. (A relatively large social democratic workers party.) And Se healy is into left unity now. The ISN are ready to go now as are the ex socialist party members. But the socialist party aren't interested in anything that doesn't go way beyond the existing left All the hassle of faction fighting without the masses!. As for the SWP, they aren't even invited to the split.

by seedot Thu Jun 01, 2006 23:47

but as KJ says, you have to put his in the context of the elections. Not just this one but the 2002 General election, where the electorate voted out the opposition.

The collapse of Fine Gael opened up the possibility that now only a weakened FF could produce a two party government. This time, the only realistic two party government is FF/Lab. Theres maybe twenty five constituencies where there is an anti-government vote that will yield a seat for a new opposition - wherever that comes from. SF's willingness to go into government with anybody except the most obscure of the neo-liberals means that they too are yielding space to a true opposition. Labour is in the hands of the PRICK.

Prediction 1: there won't be a new left party of any significance before or after this election

Prediction 2: The demands of the technical grouping system will see whoever is elected as a 'left' independent acting more cohesively in the Dail, without any need for on the ground co-operation. For the media they will continue the process of becoming a unit.

Prediction 3: Dublin will see interminable rows beteen the existing micro-movements which will possibly cost a few seats and definitely be of no interest outside the Teachers club in the long term

Prediction 4: oppositional movements in Ireland will continue to grow and network - whether this develops electorally or even pays much attention to electoralism is to be seen.

Prediction 5: This alliance will continue to roll. If it isn't this one, another will.

As an aside to this, can I point out that the smartest political operator of this generation has also spotted this and is positioning himself on the opposition benches. Bertie Aherne readily rifles through Joe Higgins clothes and claims him and socialism for Fiana Fail while opposing government policies such as decentralisation and the sale of Aer Lingus, pinning them on the real nasty boys, those privatising, decentralising, ladder climbing PD's.. If a new opposition is not formed - the government is aiming to be the opposition.

by Dermot Lacey Fri Jun 02, 2006 10:42

What a fascinating thread. I knew I had misled my "Life of Brian" dvd - clearly someone here has got it!

by Caobhin Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:46

What a councillor -I knew we'd mislaid Royston but we have our owncopy here!

by hack Fri Jun 02, 2006 16:09

If we had a Labour party that stood up for working class people and didn't sell themselves so short to Fine Gael, (you didn't get as much as a single reform off them), we'd all be in the labour party and fine gael would probably be resting in peace by now. no one expects the labour party to be revolutionaries but at least Try to get some reforms for our class instead of constantly constantly taking the other side.

by Dermot lacey Tue Jun 06, 2006 15:32

Hack,

I don't expect you to agree with me but I am very proud of my record of delivery as a City Councillor on a whole range of fronts that benefit ordianry hardworking familes. On housing, on community development, on provision of community facilities and transport, environemental and traffic issues my record is second to none. As Chair of the Save Baggot Street Hospital I led one of the fe campaigns that actually won the batlle to save the hospital. No soundbite campaign that - just a real win for ordinary people.

It has long been my opinion that ordinary people would be best served by a reformed and restructured Local Government system that is one of several reasons why I still remain proud of defending Local Government and Dublin City Council on what was a difficult and unpopular issue. If the left is to have a credible future and I hope it does it must start engaging with the Social Democrats within the left community who are not the enemy but in many cases the front line

by ATGWU - ATGWU Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:54

There is a full page preview of this very important conference in Daily Ireland today (Wednesday 14, June).

by ATGWU Wed Jun 14, 2006 16:43

Daily Ireland article

http://dailyireland.televisual.co.uk/home.tvt?_ticket=1...opp=1

by Con Carroll Thu Jun 15, 2006 10:41

if the conference on Saturday can work to build a left political class group putting forward class analysis in none sectarian way then this move has to be welcomed.
are we just a talking shop do we want to damage the obnoxious politics of the right of Mc Dowell Harney , Rabbitte Kenny with their cosy journalists in the times indo?
if this is not the agenda then we might as well go home and allow the obnoxious to tell us what is in our best interests.
neither do we need prophets of the working class telling us that they are working class.
left class political analysis isthe way forward

by SP head Thu Jun 15, 2006 14:34

Contrary to the letter sent out, Joe Higgins will not address this conference and the Socialist Party will not participate in any premature 'left alliance' as has been stated many times before.

by Topper Thu Jun 15, 2006 16:03

"The Amalgamated Transport and General Workers Union is hosting a Conference in Dublin on 10th June 2006 to bring together all those on the left who oppose coalition with the right, to discuss how an anti-coalition left alternative can be provided for working people. Political parties and groups, trade union, community and campaign activists, and interested individuals, who are opposed to shoring up the conservative parties and wish to see an alternative built, are cordially invited to attend and participate in the day’s deliberations. An open, frank, friendly and forward- looking discussion is aimed for, without dwelling on past differences."

Hmmm. Nowhere in that paragraph can I see the words "this conference aims to form a left alliance". Or anything of the sort. I do see an intention "to discuss how an anti-coalition left alternative can be provided for working people." Even if the SP believes the conditions at the moment aren't right for a left alliance, you're really going to have to explain why it is impossible for the SP to participate in a discussion of this sort. Nobody is obliged to enter into any binding commitments if they attend the ATGWU conference.

by Dermot Lacey Fri Jun 16, 2006 10:53

Ah Comrades it is usual to have the split after the formation not before.

by seedot Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:10 seedot at indymedia dot ie

If the left is to have a credible future and I hope it does it must start engaging with the Social Democrats within the left community who are not the enemy but in many cases the front line

Agree totally with the above, and generally agree with your calls for more devolved local government. But Dermot, maybe if the social democrats adopted a less sneering tone perhaps they would be easier to engage with. Your life of Brian and split comments are contributing to a positive and open debate in what manner exactly?

by Dermot Lacey Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:22

Thanks for your comment Seedot and I suppose I deserve your approbation. However I think my comment about about the split and the previous Life of Brian one arose directly from some of the strange comments on this and other threads. However, as I think your criticism is a genuine view from someone who would like the Left to be positive, I accept it.

by Luke Reid Sun Jun 18, 2006 13:48

I unfortunately made a bad decision to attend this meeting yesterday. Firstly, there were more people on the single decker bus coming into town than turned up for this farce. A room full of mainly aging people who dislike/distrust each other but still attended for whatever imagined reason being hosted by a Labour party member and a "secret squirrel" provo. I foolishly though that there was a left alternative in Ireland. From this meeting, its apparent theres not even a left in Dublin.
I know people will mail back saying they did not attend because so and so organised/attended this meeting but I think its time to get real.
Those at yesterdays meeting have no relevance to Irish working people. A talking shop that could have taken place in a phone box.

by Lou Reid Sun Jun 18, 2006 21:59

Hmm, let's hear what YOU have to offer Luke - other than childish abuse

by green shield stamp Sun Jun 18, 2006 22:27

"... I suppose I deserve your approbation."

Message for Dermot Lacey: If you are going to use words like approbation to appear more intelligent than you are, it's a good idea to have a notion of what they mean.

Perhaps you meant opprobrium?

by Luke Reid Sun Jun 18, 2006 23:09

What's childish about my views? I was there and I can tell you now, NOTHING will come from this meeting. Any real attempt to engage in a left alternative will never be undertaken by individuals who have spent 20 odd years resenting each other while having no touch with working people. Dermot Lacey may be a clown forever known for introducing double taxes but at least he engages with real people.
these people calling thenselves left/alternative is almost like Bertie saying hes a socialist. It's all play acting.
What are the important issues facing working people. certainly not Shannon-Iraq.
What have I to offer. I took time out to attend this meeting and honestly, I felt I would be letting myself down if I even gave any credance to this farce.

by peter - none Sun Jun 18, 2006 23:10

well you've got to start somewhere, but probably nothing will happen without the sp getting on board. Which isn't likely this side of the election. At least with these meetings there may be something to offer to the sp to get them involved.

by X man - the real team Mon Jun 19, 2006 01:55

those who were there were trying to build a new alternative..rather than pretending that Fg/labour can be an alternative..many there were clear that something else is needed..a left that connects with people..that opposes privatisation on principal..that opposes the right wing thatcherite agenda..effecively accepted by labour, SF, greens who are prepared to go into govt with neoliberal FG/FF/PDs...
the begrudgers who complain on this website can live forever in their fantasy land of perfect isolation...those who want to fight for and believe an alternative is achieveable should ignore the begruders and continue with the successes they are achieving on the ground, those who say the time isnt right should be ignored and those who want to build a genuine new lef t should push on to actually make a real difference and not forever live in the island of web irelevance..get out there and do something...

by Dermot Lacey Mon Jun 19, 2006 16:33

Greenshield Stamp - You are of course correct miss spelling does sometimes occur when I am hurriedly typing on to Indymedia so that I can keep up with the Mad 00ps I mean Far Left.

Luke,

Not sure which of your inaccuracies I should comment on but I will, on reflection, Mature reflection even, to coin a phrase, stick with just one of them. As someone on the Left ( albeit the nice soft Social Democratic Left) and as someone who did not support the initial introduction of the waste charges ( for reasons that were to do with the structure not the principle) far from voting to impose Double Taxation I remain proud that my vote stopped them from being raised to the level that the City Manager wanted and that some would have liked to see imposed because it would have given some "left wingers" are phyrric victory. As Luke would say ( maybe) ordinary people have more sense than to believe in that nonsense. Anyway sorry the planned left love in did not go well - perhaps next time!

by Con Carroll - class-war Mon Jun 19, 2006 18:14

what does Mr.Reid have to offer?
one cannot dismiss people who have been involved in class politics over the years

yes we know that there were oppptunistics there from the swp
and others from the Socialist party
whom I wouldn't touch with a barge pole
they probaly feel the same about me
thats life sin e
as for some provo at the meeting in hiding about been a republican I haven't a clue who you are talking about
enlighten us please
do we want another year of the right dictating the agenda
or are we serious about putting across the class agenda voice

by gss Tue Jun 20, 2006 01:14

to Dermot Lacey

It's not a misspelling when you use a word that you obviously don't know the meaning of. It's called trying to appear to have a larger vocabulary than you actually have.

Get over yourself.

by D'other Tue Jun 20, 2006 01:35

Apart from the usual back and forth sniping, is there no chance of a decent report coming out of this? So far we've been told it could have taken place in a phone box, that [insert groupsucle here] opportunists were there and all the usual. Personal reports tell me there was sixty or more at it - so surely amongst such a gatering there has to be something worth reporting?

by seedot Tue Jun 20, 2006 02:42

I got there pretty late (2.30) so can't give much more than a flavour. I would have a loose affiliation with CWAG and ATGWU (take what you want) but am definitely giving a personal impression as I haven't really talked to anybody else about the meeting.

The meeting was in the Matt Merrigan hall in the T&G offices and I got there for the end of the final session, at a meeting / conference which had been going on since 11 that morning. I knew most of the people there, at least to see, and most were Dublin based left wing activists with a top table of Dessie Bonass, Joan Collins, Jimmy Kelly, Mick O'Reilly and Kieran Allen. I would reckon about 80 chairs with about 50 people were in the hall when I was there.

As well as the two on the top table, there was a large number of SWP activists on the opposite side of the room to me - I came in while Richard Boyd Barret was speaking and heard at least three more interventions after that in the same vein. Mainly about the potential to attract new people into structures that could be focussed on the election (I think). The issue of whether it was a network or an alliance or a party proposed was well raised by a SWP TU activist but skirted around, although there was general agreement that the party thing was ruled out, not just in deference to the SP who had a couple of contributions from the back of the room. I didn't notice any SF or Labour presence - although people may have left after the morning session.

There seemed to be two moods or bodies in the room - those who were in favour of co-operaton but saw it as a longer, slower process and those who wanted to push a tighter agenda, especially in terms of preparing a slate. There were proposals around another conference (I'm a bit woolly on what or how things are decided at something like this but think Sept was agreed) along with discussion of a campaign on social partnership. I heard talk of organising committees but to be honest had neither the inclination or the interest to check if one was set up, how it was configured etc.

The closing sections were OK laying out of stall - Joan Collins will be running in Dublin South Central and talked about that, Kieran Allen laid out the timetable for the election, Mick O'Reilly talked about changes in the Industrial Relations Act to allow worker solidarity. People were fairly up front and straightforward about their objectives which was refreshing to see.

The mood was a lot less acrimonious than the open CIL meeting in the Teachers club on the 6th Dec last and the debate less heated than the meeting with Daithi Doolin from SF and Paul Dillon from labour. The length of the meeting, the location in the union hall and the time of the day may all have made people less combative but I think there was also a move from some of the posturing and positioning of the other meetings as people were more explaining their position in as upfront a manner as possible. An interesting array of points around policies and policy formation (including a proposal to tax all capital gains on housing as the basis of a single issue campaign) were signs of a bigger, meatier discussion that needs to be facilitated and was sidestepped a bit too much for my liking but maybe i was just getting bored with the general politeness and striving for co-operation.

constructive tone of meeting: 5/10

new people engaged/re-engaged: 3/10

commitment to continue and avoid splits: 7/10

sectarian infighting entertainment value: 1.5/10

*note: as this is a crap report (tm) i am more than happy to be corrected, any of the many ommissions pointed out or castigated. I have no interest in defending or arguing the text above.

by D'other Tue Jun 20, 2006 16:54

Exactly the sort of feedback thats needed after a meeting that was billed as so darn important by so many, but may not be of the vintage of politics some of us would like to tag our flag to on a Saturday morning. Thanks.