Branch meeting report

Submitted by Janine on 29 June, 2005 - 9:59

Notes from AWL North London branch meeting 21st June 2005

  • Estate residents stop privatisation
  • Hackney schools campaign
  • Branch activities
  • Iraqi trade unions

Political report: Aspland estate and Marcon Court anti-privatisation campaign

Janine gave some background to the campaign and the estate’s history.

Marcon Court built in the 50s and run down since then. Tenants’ & Residents’ Association (TRA) set up in 2001 for both estates. The Council promised repairs that were not done, Marcon Court considered uneconomical for refurbishment, this argument used to justify plans to sell it to the private sector, who would be interested in it as a good site for rich city commuters. Council’s preferred plan was demolition and replacement with mainly private homes. TRA rejected this and campaigned for refurbishment.

Last week – victory! – the Council caved in to the TRA campaign following a lengthy, costly ‘consultation process’ and have will now vote on a recommendation not to privatise/demolish it. This is a big victory for a small community. Why was the campaign won?

  • The campaign didn’t rely on the Council, was organised politically, was not co-opted into Council bureaucratic decoys such as the consultation process.
  • The TRA did not accept Council arguments or promises, but discussed and “unpicked” what the Council said, recognised traps, countered arguments, did not back down.
  • TRA held its reps accountable.
  • Reps gave regular feedback to residents at each stage in the Council’s manoeuvrings – which also made it hard for the Council to paint the reps as an unrepresentative clique.
  • The campaign was political and stressed class issues eg. defending a working-class community against redevelopment for rich commuters and private profit.
  • Campaign broadened the debate to include the argument that social housung is a right – housing for need, not profit.
  • Independant representation – TRA was not a ‘residents review group’, always stressing to residents and to Council that they were negotiating as reps, not just talking with the Council.
  • Used the Hackney Gazette – for example when the estate was tarted up for a VIP visit.

During each period of the negotiations, the TRA tested the Council’s proposals against its agreed five key principles:

  • No rent rises
  • No transfer to a new landlord
  • No loss of green spaces or facilities
  • No loss of council housing
  • Maximum protection and minimum disruption for residents

It is important to remember that the community has won a battle not a war – Marcon Court still needs to be done up. The TRA to demand how much the consultation process cost, and tabulate how much work could have been done instead.

The estate is now on the Decent Homes programme but is last in line to receive any funding (2010). The other four estates in the Review have willingly agreed to privatisation. The TRA will also keep on at the Council to make repairs they are legally obliged to do.

This campaign is a good model for others. Janine (a member of Workers’ Liberty) is the TRA Chairperson. She argued in the community for this sort of democratic, political campaign, which has proved to be successful so far. The campaign also took on board ideas and strategies from other residents – everyone’s input was welcomed. The Workers’ Liberty view got a good hearing because of our ongoing involvement in the TRA and the community – we had not just “parachuted in” for this particular campaign.

Several residents of the estates now regularly buy our newspaper, ‘Solidarity’. Our local newsletter, ‘Hackney Solidarity’ is preparing the ground for a political challenge to Hackney Council in next year’s local elections. We need more discussion about our political work in and with this community.

Discussion

Chris detailed his experiences in a similar campaign in Southall. Stressed the importance of this victory, as it is rare. Reiterated the importance of not parachuting in – ‘people don’t vote for strangers.’

Jean asked described Council tactics in Tower Hamlets – deliberately run down estates to make privatisation easier. She also reported her experiences doorknocking last week on the Pembury, the biggest estate in Hackney Central and already in the hands of Peabody.

She met a woman who had lived there 25 years, and who as a tenant had experienced all the numerous shifts in policy and maintenance of local housing during that time. She felt that under Peabody (one of the ‘better’ jobbing companies) she had never seen anything worse. Asked what she would say to anyone facing a vote over privatisation she said ‘...tell ‘em bollocks.’

From this woman and other people, it is clear that many on the Pembury are very angry, with much promised for the estate but little done. Also what work has been done – sub-contracted, has been terrible. The most recent was a case of asbestos removal while tenants were still living in the properties, told by workers to come back at night. Returning, people found damaged furniture and dust swirling about.

Janine added that residents seemed to have little faith in Pembury’s TRA, and saw it as too close to Peabody, the landlord. No response over the asbestos incident. There is a TRA federation of council estates, but it is politically weak.

Homerton School campaign

Ruah reported. A campaign currently in Hackney to stop the closure of Homerton boys’ school – big meeting last week, lots of angry parents. The Learning Trust (quango running Hackney education) hellbent on closing school and replacing it with an academy despite opposition and lack of even nominal grounds (besides bad press) for closure. With nearly 50% of secondary pupils schooled outside the borough, this is a big issue.

Agreed – a stall outside Brook school; mobilise for demo planned on 30th June.

Branch activities

Paper Sales

We arranged public sales and door-to-door canvassing/sales

G8

Some London AWL members going to Edinburgh. Others leafleting Live8 in Hyde Park 2nd July.

Summer Fair in East Finchley (Sunday 27th)

AWL Summer School

Political discussion: Iraqi trade unions

Clive introduced

Stated that his analysis will focus on specific unions, and comparisons between them, rather than general info.

There are two main union organisations in Iraq.

  • Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions (IFTU) Dominated by Communist party
  • Federation of Workers’ Councils and Unions of Iraq (FWCUI) – associated with the Worker Communist Party and the unemployed. WCPI dominated but not just a front.

Also independant unions

  • Bazra based General Union of Oil employees – different formative origins to above federations, stated origins are that it came out of the ’91 rising against Saddam. Hassan Juma, their leader recently on tour in England. Judging from his contradictory speeches he attempts to balance elements in the union that are sympathetic to and hostile to the Jihadis.
  • Teachers Union - little known, big membership
  • Kurdish Unions - aligned with either KDP or PDK, probably for geographic rather than political reasons. Kurdish nationalist parties nationalist but also tribally aligned.

US Labor Against the War – have organised an American tour and have succeeded in getting representatives from all the main unions to take part. Given the bitter sectarian attitudes between the federations this is some feat (though they will not be speaking on the same platform) and hopefully an indication of future united front action.

A common accusation levelled at the IFTU is that they have gained sole representation recognition by the occupying forces and the interim govt, that they are collaborators with the regime. In their defence the IFTU states that they do not have sole recognition.

IFTU and Workers’ Councils both campaign in meetings for the implementation of WTO international labour law as opposed to current Ba’thist law on the statute which Americans are in no hurry to change.

Both federations denounce each other as irrelevant/ unrepresentative.

Hard facts on Iraqi unions are very hard to come by. – reports from visits by trade unionists, vague strike reports. Often TU visitors come back with observations and information suited to their own analysis of class relations – eg TUC report gives validation to some Trade Union bodies regarding sending money, but says very little else about what these bodies represent or what is going on overall in the labour movement.

A distinction between opposition to the regime and the Islamists

  • FWCUI against the occupation and the Islamists.
  • IFTU says against both but has been involved with the government, seen as in ‘collaboration, quislings.’

Alan Johnson (Labour Friends of Iraq) defends proper trade unionism, but with crap politics. This raises an important question. The left here broadly has two responses to the IFTU:

  • They are collaborators, do not support them
  • Those IFTU activists that have been murdered by the Islamists have not been murdered because they are Trade Unionists (reason enough for most Jihadis) but because they are collaborators.

At its heart Trade unionism can be viewed as collaboration, it is where workers through reps negotiate with the reps of the ruling class, whoever that may be in a given situation. Those are the conditions of how workers organise.

The most important issue is to advocate a united-front approach. The Iraqi trade unions and federations must unite to assert workers’ rights, and also, more broadly, in defence of democracy, civil rights, secularism, women’s rights, sexual freedom, etc.

Discussion followed.

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.