Amicus left caves in

Submitted by cathy n on 31 May, 2006 - 11:58

By an Amicus member
The first issue of the Amicus Unity Gazette to appear since its takeover by the supporters of Amicus General Secretary Derek Simpson was published in April.
Amicus Unity Gazette (AUG) is simultaneously the name of the “Broad Left” in Amicus and also its (electronic and hard-copy) publication. At the AGM of the AUG, held in February of this year, Simpson’s supporters narrowly won the contested leading positions in the AUG.
In 2002 the AUG had campaigned in support of Simpson for the position of Amicus General Secretary. His defeat of the right-wing incumbent Sir Ken Jackson was hailed as a victory for the Left. But since then Simpson has shifted sharply to the right.
In particular, the union’s membership has been left in the dark as Amicus lurches from one set of mergers (with the GPMU and UNIFI) to another (with the TGWU and the GMB). In recent years the union’s structures and decision-making processes have become less transparent and less accessible to ordinary members.
Judging by the first issue of the new-look “Amicus Unity Gazette”, Simpson is now unlikely to come under undue pressure from that particular quarter.
The Gazette has “abandoned the last remnants of ‘oppositionalism’,” proclaims the lead article, with ‘oppositionalism’ defined as “opposing for opposing’s sake.” Unfortunately, but significantly, the Gazette does not provide a single example of where the AUG has supposedly engaged in such ‘oppositionalism’ in the past.
The AUG is now in a very different situation from in the past, continues the article. It is now confronted with “the challenge of having the lead role in the leadership of the union.”
The new role allocated to the AUG is that of giving a helping hand to the General Secretary and the union’s NEC: “Whilst we readily acknowledge that the NEC and the General Secretary will use their best endeavours to implement these policies (passed by the 2005 Amicus national conference), they cannot do it alone.”
The AUG is also holding out the hand of friendship to the right-wing factions in Amicus, in particular ‘MSF for Labour’ and ‘AEEU United’ (which were active in the MSF and AEEU before they merged to form Amicus), and to the ATU Network (a network of full-time officials with distinctly New Labour leanings). The new-look AUG is in a let’s-kiss-and-make-up mood:
“The other groups have abandoned their previous policies and political methods as they reconcile themselves to the new situation. Whilst we must never forget the treatment meted out to Gazette supporters in the past, a real opportunity is here for us to engage all activists on our democratic and progressive agenda.”
This conveniently sidesteps the “treatment meted out to Gazette supporters” in the here and now – above all, the sacking a few months ago of three Amicus employees who were Gazette supporters. That sacking was, and is, backed by Simpson and his supporters on the NEC and in the AUG. The Gazette does not mention, even in passing, the campaign for their re-instatement!
The lead article argues that “we need to change the direction of the Labour Party and reclaim it for the benefit of all workers, their families and the less fortunate throughout the world.” The article concludes with the stirring appeal: “For a Labour government committed to socialist policies!” Another article in the Gazette (“Why Blair Must Go!”) demands that Blair should announce his retirement as leader at this year’ Labour Party conference. Stirring stuff indeed! Blair Out!! Socialist Policies In !!!
Until, that is, one reads the (metaphorically speaking) small print. The “socialist policies” which the Gazette looks forward to are the implementation of the Warwick Agreement, and a Warwick Mark Two for the next General Election:
“Amicus, along with other trade union affiliates to the Labour Party influenced the final Labour Party Policy Forum before the General Election to create a workplace agenda within Labour’s 2005 election manifesto. This has been called the Warwick Agreement. 56 points to advance workplace issues were part of the agreement. …”
“The Gazette believes that the role of Blair’s successor is to deliver the Warwick agenda in full, and then face the next General Election with a new vision: ‘Warwick 2’, which should address further issues in the workplace. By doing this the new leader will repay the faith and support of not just Amicus members but also of all trade union members throughout the country.”
For those who have forgotten the exciting “socialist” policies incorporated into the Warwick Agreement, some examples include: “using ASBOs in pubs and on buses”, “engaging in effective dialogue over the future of public sector pensions”, “actively promoting accredited proof-of-age cards for age-restricted sales”, “recognition of the importance of fish-processing in Scotland”, “commitments (undefined) on world debt relief”, and “a discussion between government and unions on the recognition of the value of facility time for workplace union reps.”
Another article (“Bring Back Our Trade Union Rights”) calls for support for the Trade Union Freedom Bill Early Day Motion currently gathering signatures in the House of Commons.
Obviously, it would have been impolite for the author to have gone over old ground and to have dug up Derek Simpson’s role in the Wembley Stadium dispute of 2004, when Simpson disowned striking Amicus members, and then went on to support the expulsion of four AUG supporters from the NEC AUG caucus for having voted against repudiation. This was hardly an exemplary defence of trade union rights.
But the campaign for trade union freedoms raises a broader question – if the Warwick Agreement so lauded by another article in the Gazette is so wonderful, why is there a need for such a campaign in the first place? Could it be because the Warwick Agreement committed nobody to anything, and least of all the Labour government?
Prize article in the Gazette, without a doubt, is that penned by one time Trades Union CND Chairperson Jimmy Barnes. Jimmy laments that, thanks to Thatcher and now Blair, “there is very little investment in our economy” with the result that “the bulk of our manufacturing base has been depleted.” Only the arms industry has survived unscathed: “It is the only area where we are able to function in modern materials and which has the technical base to apply modern manufacturing techniques.”
Of course, Jimmy ruefully admits, “it is an unpleasant and unhealthy position to be in to be dependent upon sales to ugly and repressive regimes.” But there is simply no alternative: “We need the resources currently held in the defence manufacturing industries. (We must) use the defence production as a springboard to rebuild civilian manufacturing. The existing production of warships should be used to aid the development of high tech production capacity in Britain.”
If nothing else, this article exposes just how stupid those mullahs in Iran are. They claim not to be developing nuclear weapons? What they should be saying is: “Successive ayatollahs have failed to invest in our manufacturing basis. Only in the field of nuclear weapons do we have the technical base to apply modern manufacturing techniques. The production of nuclear weapons will therefore be used to aid the development of high tech production capacity in Iran.”
As an article in the magazine of a trade union ‘Broad Left’, however, it is surely without precedent – a verdict which could be legitimately applied to the new-look Gazette as a whole.

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.