As a UNISON NEC member I’ve had a couple of messages from UNISON members lobbying in the run up to Conference over the last two days, one welcome and one less so.
The Dudley Branch are lobbying us for support for their sensible motion that we should affiliate to the Construction Safety Campaign (CSC), which has not been prioritised for debate (and will not therefore be discussed) but which the NEC has agreed to support “with qualifications”.
The “qualification” is that the NEC was told that we would not be permitted to affiliate. A diligent reader of this blog checked this out with the CSC who advised that they would very much welcome UNISON’s affiliation.
Since motions which are not taken at Conference are then referred to the NEC it is well worthwhile for the Dudley branch to be lobbying NEC members to support affiliation to the Campaign and I wish them luck.
A less welcome letter appeared to come from one UNISON branch official also on behalf of two others. This was a complaint about the decision not to permit the “Trade Union Friends of Israel” to have a stall at our Conference this year.
In objecting to this decision the letter’s authors said; “We believe that Unison have a duty of care to all members who attend conference no matter what there point of view and that FREE SPEECH and DEMOCRACEY must be upheld at all costs or the TRADE UNION MOVEMENT is LOST. We feel that we are attending conference in an atmosphere of HOSTILITY and INTIMADATION and FEAR of VIOLENCE.”
Having been copied in on the letter I expressed a personal view in response; “Speaking purely personally I am very glad that there will not be a TUFI stall at UNISON Conference this year. Following the genocidal attack upon Gaza earlier this year I would have been deeply offended had we given space to any group acting as apologists for the Zionist state. If any UNISON member wishes to ensure that TUFI is permitted a stand at future Conferences it would be very simple to put a motion to Conference to that effect. If that motion were supported by a majority of members in a branch, then prioritised for debate at Conference and then supported at Conference this would demonstrate that that was the wish of UNISON members. Incidentally, I think that there is a real concern about violence in relation to the presence of TUFI at our Conference, but that this is a concern about the violence perpetrated by the Israeli Defence Force upon the Palestinian people.I should stress that this is not an official response from UNISON but simply the expression of personal opinion from an individual to whom you had copied your message.”
I hope that Conference passes the Composite motion on Palestine and that we continue to work in solidarity with the Palestinian people.
Update on Friday - I apologise for any offence caused to the authors of the letter in the original version of this post, which has now been edited. I strongly disagree with what was said in the letter but respect absolutely the right of fellow trade unionists to express their views.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Diligent eh :) wonder who you could be referring too...
And as for tufi - it is disgraceful for them to suggest they are attending our conference in fear of violence, given the fear of violence that ppl of palestine are facing every day!
By gosh Jon we agree, I've had to have a sit down to recover.
Well, it looks like UNISON is well on the way to driving out all Jews who, like most British Jews, are broadly sympathetic to the Jewish state of Israel.
For my part I think it is rank hypocrisy to permit pro-Palestinian Muslim and Christian nationalists a stall, but deny it to pro-Jewish nationalists.
Also, Jon, the organizers were not concerned about TUFI violence on PSC members, but vice versa.
As for your implicitly attributing alleged Israeli "genocidal" violence to TUFI, presumably that goes for most British Jews too, who, as I said, are broadly, if not uncritically, sympathetic to Israel and the Jewish nationalism, or Zionism, that created it.
"it is disgraceful for them to suggest they are attending our conference in fear of violence,"
that's what they were told by Unison.
So is violence against pro-Israeli organization in the UK now acceptable?
Well gosh Jon, I'm sorry it would offend you. We wouldn't want you to feel uncomfortable! Being confronted by those with a different opinion to yours must be very distressing! How wonderful that UNISON have taken this decision, we wouldn't want you to get upset.
Well I get confronted with different opinions at every meeting of the UNISON NEC so I don't worry about that.
I do worry about my Union giving a platform to apologists for Zionism - and that is not out of any hostility to Jewish workers but to the military action taken by the Zionist state against the Palestinian people.
We would not have given space to supporters of apartheid.
I am hoping that this debate does not mean that those of us on the broad left do not recognise the genuine work and contribution our Jewish brothers and sisters have made over the years to the class struggle. We need to keep a balance here and separate the Zionists from the oppressed who can be found everywhere and on both sides. Violence must be condemned on all sides and UN resolutions accepted and implemented by all. Israel must accept the creation of a free independent Palestinian state and the Palestinians will have to live with an Israeli state that denounces violence and oppression.
Nick Venedi
Well I mostly agree with Cmr. Venedi.
There should be a Palestinian state and both them and the Israelis should live in peace next to each other and helping each other.
But that's not the issue here, you have a major union basically saying it can not guarantee that Israelis or their trade unionist associates wouldn't be attacked at a Union conference.
Despite the fact that numerous other "trade union friends", Soviet, Russian, Chinese, Serbian, etc have never been subject to such a threat.
Do I need to remind people about the Soviet rule in Afghanistan, suppression of free trade unions and the Gulags? Or remind trade unionists about the Russian barbaric campaign in Cheynia ? Or China's conquest, occupation and continued rule of Tibet? etc
So that issue needs to be addressed.
Finally, trade unionists need to think more and use less the terminology "Zionist" as if they are spitting out a Brillo Pad.
Thoughtful trade unionists need to be aware of the long history of Soviet "anti-Zionism" and how such terms are loaded. For example, on the Far Right the term "Zionist" is interchangeable with "Jew".
Trade unionists need to think more on these issues, otherwise the trade union movement will become seriously weakened.
so Jon, the question of implied violence within the trade union movement doesn't worry you??
Or is it fair game where Israelis are concerned?
Tell me, do you remember any Soviet or Russian trade union friends ever being threatened with violence in spite of Soviet/Russian atrocities carried out in the Gulags, Afghanistan or Cheynia, etc ?
Where those issues of a lesser importance?
You need to think thru the implications of these actions.
Would a delegation from China that defended its govt. policy in Tibet be liable for attack at a Unison conference, or is it just Israelis that should worry ?
This is a complete non-issue (the supposed threat of violence).
Whoever suggested this as the reason not to allow a TUFI stall was wrong.
We were told at the NEC that this was a political decision. And it was.
I have been at every UNISON Conference. We sometimes have heated debates but to suggest that there is any threat of violence is absurd.
Delegates wearing TUFI T-shirts were present (in small numbers but quite obviously happy to identify themselves with their views without fear).
I had a perfectly civil discussion with a couple of delegates and amended this blog post in response to their request.
The real issue here is the rights and wrongs of our excluding from our Conference those who are at variance with our policies.
Whoever misinformed TUFI that their security could not be assured did us a disservice and diverted the discussion in an unhelpful way.
"This is a complete non-issue (the supposed threat of violence)."
Well, it wasn't for those potentially at the receiving end, wasn't it?
Jon, you didn't address the issue of Russian Trade Union friends, etc?
btw, if you wish to exclude people, with a tenable political position, from Unions then that only weakens them
I am just astonished at the lack of self-awareness over this issue, no one can see the historical precedences? or understand the sensitivities?
Post a Comment