New Labour Row In Sligo

sligo | worker & community struggles and protests | other press

Thursday February 22, 2007 17:29

by M. M. Carroll

War of words over Clr. McGarry’s claim

The war of words in the Labour Party between Clr. Jimmy McGarry and activist Brian Scanlon continues this week, says the Sligo Champion.

In a letter to the editor, Mr. Scanlon, replying to remarks made by Clr. McGarry last week, said he noted that Clr. McGarry had alleged that Scanlon’s resignation from the Labour Party was part of a process to undermine him.

Clr. McGarry, who is the Labour Party’s candidate in the forthcoming general election, had also claimed he had played his part in making the party ‘more vibrant and positive’.

Mr. Scanlon’s letter went on: ‘Clr. McGarry will be well aware that I and the vast majority of Labour Party members in the constituency opposed his application to join the party.

‘He will also know that I was opposed to him becoming a member because in my opinion, he never shared the values of the party and consistently voted against the Labour Party at County Council and Borough Council meetings.

‘Clr. McGarry voted consistently to impose service charges while Labour members and supporters campaigned against the charges. He voted for privatisation of the refuse service while the Labour Party was campaigning to retain it as a public service.
‘He voted in favour of the US using Shannon Airport while Labour members were campaigning against the use of the airport by the US war machine.’

Mr. Scanlon also accused Clr. McGarry of not only voting for a major increase in water charges for farmers, he actually used his casting vote at the Council’s estimates meeting to ensure that the increase was adopted.

Mr. Scanlon went on: ‘Since Clr. McGarry’s admission to the Labour Party, the organisation in this constituency had become a shadow of its former self. It is in total disarray, is no longer a campaigning party and no longer organises public events or meetings.

‘Last year, when it was unable to hold meetings of the constituency Council because a quorum could never be reached, it was left with no alternative but to change its Standing Orders to reduce the quorum to a handful.

‘In advance of this month’s Constituency Council annual general meeting when nominations were sought to fill the twelve officer positions on the Council, only three members in the entire constituency were prepared to allow their names to go forward. And Clr. McGarry claims he is playing his part in making the party more vibrant and positive’, the letter concluded.