Unions reject Rabbitte's lay-offs

by White Fang Fri Dec 10, 2004 17:23

What you personally have observed is not the universe in its totality. Or perhaps you are a solipsist? If you are certain that LP members are not involved in campaigns then there is nothing that I can write to persuade you otherwise.

by John McCormack Fri Dec 10, 2004 17:17

"Try reasoned discussion with LP members over a pint or coffee after meeting, actions or protests"

I can genuinely say that I have never seen an LP contingent on any 'actions or protests', except for the big anti war demos in 2003.

by White Fang Fri Dec 10, 2004 15:21

The LP doesnt have a formal campaign against this legislation (I'll have to check re exact bills involved), neither do the Greens, SF, SP, SWP, WP, WSM, ISN. But they are also all fighting it but inside and outside of the City Council.

Maybe we need a campaign thats not Party Political.

by Liam Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:34

Infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me
The decision to lay off Mr Laverty and Cllr Byrne, which occurred following a consultant's review, has already been criticised by SIPTU and the National Union of Journalists.
Lay-offs cause dissent in Labour
Mark Hennessy, Political Correspondent

Labour Party leader Mr Pat Rabbitte yesterday strongly complained to the party's National Executive Council that internal party enemies are trying to undermine his leadership.

During an occasionally stormy meeting of the NEC, Mr Rabbitte bitterly complained about a recent series of leaks from within the party to some newspapers, including The Irish Times.

He said he believed that those who oppose his preference for a Fine Gael alliance, rather than one that leaves options open for a possible deal with Fianna Fáil, are now using issues to oppose him.

Yesterday's private meeting of the NEC dealt heavily with Mr Rabbitte's decision to lay off two members of the party's Ely Place headquarters staff, Mr Angus Laverty and Cllr Ciarán Byrne.

Following a lengthy debate, the NEC accepted a motion put forward by SIPTU president and NEC member, Mr Jack O'Connor, which called for the normal "industrial practices" to be observed.

However, Mr O'Connor withdrew a secondary element of the motion, asking for the lay-offs to be suspended, which, if passed, would have been an effective challenge to Mr Rabbitte's leadership.

Though Mr O'Connor appears to have been trying to avoid an open confrontation with Mr Rabbitte, others were more openly critical, sources indicated.

Mr Rabbitte said he was trying to improve the party's performance and that he would shortly announce the appointment of a chief operating officer, though it is not clear how this post will relate to that of the general secretary, Mr Mike Allen.

The decision to lay off Mr Laverty and Cllr Byrne, which occurred following a consultant's review, has already been criticised by SIPTU and the National Union of Journalists.

During often testy exchanges, Mr Rabbitte was strongly supported by Ms Roisín Shortall, Mr Emmet Stagg, Ms Liz McManus and others.

Last night, the former president of the Labour Party Mr Proinsias de Rossa declined to make any comment about the lay-off decision: "This is a matter for the management of the party." Though the Kinnear report recommended job losses, it is not clear how many were proposed. The figure has been put variously at between five and eight.

© The Irish Times

by Liam Thu Dec 09, 2004 17:20

"The poster/leaflet issue isnt just a matter of a Councillor proposing a motion. Its yet more of the powers reserved to the City Manager. Its a difficult issue, but on a case by case basis its being fought."

Do you know under what legislation? I thought the council could vote to overturn this ban.
Where is the campaign being run by the Labour Party to protest against this dimunition of democracy?
If you read cllr. Lacey's statements elsewhere you would think that democracy was wonderful in City Hall.

by eeekkk Thu Dec 09, 2004 16:38

not being fined/arrested etc.

Been in Belfast quite a bit recently and it feels way more like a vibrant city with vibrant communities/arts scene and political (sub)cultures than Dublin. Why? Because there are flyposters everywhere. Dublin looks like what it is - a sterile rat run for shopping and working and precious little else.

by Trotwatch / White Fang Thu Dec 09, 2004 16:23

You are right about the name, its unnecessarily provocative. I will find another.

Yes, its ok for you to point out your differences with the LP. But if you do it on every occasion, no matter what the context, then you will just piss people off. Sometimes us evil LP people will be involved in progressive campaigns. Occasionally only a very small number of LP members will swim against the tide and main party position. Would you prefer if they were not involved in the campaigns? Because constant hectoring wont get us to leave the LP but it might well annoy people enough to get them to drop out of certain campaigns.

Try reasoned discussion with LP members over a pint or coffee after meeting, actions or protests.

The poster/leaflet issue isnt just a matter of a Councillor proposing a motion. Its yet more of the powers reserved to the City Manager. Its a difficult issue, but on a case by case basis its being fought.

I would encourage any progressive activist who is being fined or summoned for giving out leaflets or putting up posters to contact a LP, SF, Green or Independent councillor to try and get it quashed.

My new moniker shall be White Fang.

by Paddy Thu Dec 09, 2004 16:01

In response to a series of comments which started off with 'Trotwatch' derailing this news article by criticising various other unrelated groups. The subsequent comments answering him gradually became more informative and newsworthy. -ed

Trotwatch (you got to admit its an unfortunate moniker) makes some interesting and valid points. I agree that we should not engage in denunciations of left LP members. However if our perspective is that they're wasting their time in a social democratic party then we have a duty to point out the contradictions of this position when the opportunity arises, in the hope that they will break with Labour and get involved in building a new left party that is radical, democratic and pluralist, along the lines of the SSP or Refondazione.

On the ban on posters, isn' it simply a matter of a councillor putting down a motion rescinding the ban or have I missed something? Its having a really serious effect on the ability to organise successful public meetings. If it is just a question of rescinding why has'nt some LP, SF, Ind cllr. done it already?