Sheridan abandons hope for the SSP and tries to form new party
- Thread starter Fullyplumped
- Start date
Bear said:
or SNP- or until recently SSP
As to BNP in glasgow- that used to be the case but their general election results there in 2005 indicated they had the potential to do well there- which would of course have been countered by the SSP in the past.
As to if the SSP and Solidarity arent too busy slagging each other off to counter the threat whichwill appear at the polls in 2007 (which includes their recently re-started paper sales at Ibrox) is another matter.
latest socialist worker piece -
Members of the Highlands and Islands regional council of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) last week voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity, Scotland’s socialist movement, as a group.
Three branches in the region had already voted to join Solidarity en masse with three more to vote this week.
This follows a similar situation in the south of Scotland region where over 100 members have now left to join Solidarity.
All nine listed candidates who were selected earlier this year to stand in the Highlands for the SSP in the elections to the Scottish parliament next May have now joined Solidarity.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9674
Members of the Highlands and Islands regional council of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) last week voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity, Scotland’s socialist movement, as a group.
Three branches in the region had already voted to join Solidarity en masse with three more to vote this week.
This follows a similar situation in the south of Scotland region where over 100 members have now left to join Solidarity.
All nine listed candidates who were selected earlier this year to stand in the Highlands for the SSP in the elections to the Scottish parliament next May have now joined Solidarity.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=9674
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
nwnm said:
No indication of how many members were present at the relevant branch meetings and voted for this I see. Anyone got any ideas of the figures?
It would be interesting to find out how it compares with the numbers in Glasgow and other regions voting to continue to support and build the SSP.
A useful indication of the relative strength of the regions can be found in the Voting strength of the SSP in the 2003 elections. Highlands and Irelands was the smallest region for SSP votes btw.
Region, votes, % of vote in region
Glasgow 31,116 15.6%
Lothians 27,143 5.4%
West of Scotland 18,591 7.2%
Central Scotland 17,146 7.2%
South of Scotland 14,228 5.4%
Mid Scotland and Fife 11,401 4.6%
North East Scotland 10,226 4.2%
Highlands and Islands 9,000 5.3%
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msp/elections/analysis/index.htm
QUOTE=nwnm]latest socialist worker piece -
Members of the Highlands and Islands regional council of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) last week voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity, Scotland’s socialist movement, as a group.
more swp lies- 2 easter ross and sgetland havent signed up woth the class traitors of solidarity..... and only 7 of 9 canddiates have joined up with the scabs
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/
EAST ROSS SSP BRANCH SHUNS SHERIDAN'S SOLIDARITY PARTY
08:50 - 14 September 2006
The Easter Ross branch of the Scottish Socialist Party yesterday announced that it would not be joining the new party led by former SSP leader Tommy Sheridan.
A spokesman for the branch said it had rejected a motion to affiliate to the Solidarity party - launched in Glasgow on September 3 - and transfer all branch assets and bank accounts to that party.
The Highlands and Islands Regional Council of the Scottish Socialist Party have voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity.
And all but two of the nine listed candidates for the region, who were selected earlier this year to stand for the SSP in May have now joined Solidarity.
But the Easter Ross branch has voted to stay with the SSP.
Its branch spokesman said: "Whilst we are saddened that a minority of branch members have taken the decision to leave the most successful socialist unity project in Europe, the Scottish Socialist Party Easter Ross branch remains an integral part of the SSP.
"We will continue to fight on behalf of the working class in Easter Ross and across all Scotland."
He added that the respect won through the hard work of local branch members over many years on issues, such as taking the Nigg yard into public ownership, free school meals, opposing the closure of council care homes, the privatisation of council housing stock and scrapping the council tax, would continue.
"Individual members and branches across the Highlands and Islands have rejected the new organisation. They know that there is no justification for forming another socialist party in Scotland and that there is no political basis for this split.
"Just last week, a national opinion poll put the SSP on target to maintain its current parliamentary presence. The SSP is very much alive and kicking and will continue to lead the struggle for an independent Scottish Socialist Republic," said the spokesman.
Earlier this week, the Shetland branch of the SSP voted unanimously against leaving the party and joining Solidarity.
Members of the Highlands and Islands regional council of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) last week voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity, Scotland’s socialist movement, as a group.
more swp lies- 2 easter ross and sgetland havent signed up woth the class traitors of solidarity..... and only 7 of 9 canddiates have joined up with the scabs
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/
EAST ROSS SSP BRANCH SHUNS SHERIDAN'S SOLIDARITY PARTY
08:50 - 14 September 2006
The Easter Ross branch of the Scottish Socialist Party yesterday announced that it would not be joining the new party led by former SSP leader Tommy Sheridan.
A spokesman for the branch said it had rejected a motion to affiliate to the Solidarity party - launched in Glasgow on September 3 - and transfer all branch assets and bank accounts to that party.
The Highlands and Islands Regional Council of the Scottish Socialist Party have voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP and join Solidarity.
And all but two of the nine listed candidates for the region, who were selected earlier this year to stand for the SSP in May have now joined Solidarity.
But the Easter Ross branch has voted to stay with the SSP.
Its branch spokesman said: "Whilst we are saddened that a minority of branch members have taken the decision to leave the most successful socialist unity project in Europe, the Scottish Socialist Party Easter Ross branch remains an integral part of the SSP.
"We will continue to fight on behalf of the working class in Easter Ross and across all Scotland."
He added that the respect won through the hard work of local branch members over many years on issues, such as taking the Nigg yard into public ownership, free school meals, opposing the closure of council care homes, the privatisation of council housing stock and scrapping the council tax, would continue.
"Individual members and branches across the Highlands and Islands have rejected the new organisation. They know that there is no justification for forming another socialist party in Scotland and that there is no political basis for this split.
"Just last week, a national opinion poll put the SSP on target to maintain its current parliamentary presence. The SSP is very much alive and kicking and will continue to lead the struggle for an independent Scottish Socialist Republic," said the spokesman.
Earlier this week, the Shetland branch of the SSP voted unanimously against leaving the party and joining Solidarity.
Isles socialists solid behind SSP
13 September, 2006
The Shetland branch of the Scottish Socialist Party has "rejected" the advances of former SSP leader Tommy Sheridan to join his new party Solidarity.
Branch members announced yesterday (Tuesday) that after meeting this week they had unanimously decided to remain "full and active members" of the SSP as they prepare to campaign for the council and Scottish elections next May.
Shetland is the first SSP branch to discuss their future after members of the Highlands and Islands region met last week and decided by 13 votes to one to throw their weight behind Mr Sheridan.
Shetland branch chairman Kevin Learmonth said last night: "The SSP is a party with a strong and clear track record of fighting for justice and equality. You don't just throw that away because your ex-leader has gone off in the huff and formed his own party."
Island members had said the new party Solidarity was based on "charisma, shaky alliances, and playing second fiddle to London based organisations" and had nothing to offer Shetland, SSP members or the people of Scotland.
Mr Learmonth admitted that Mr Sheridan's high profile court case, when he successfully sued the News of the World for defamation, had impacted on the party, but said it was time to look ahead.
"We've had the personal fall outs, court cases and some people leaving the SSP, but now is not the time to look back. We need active branches, active members, vision and commitment. Now is the time to look forward and act accordingly.
"Council elections are coming up in May, and people are widely dissatisfied about the performance of many of the current councillors. People have been encouraging us to contest these council seats, and it's a request that we have to take seriously."
13 September, 2006
The Shetland branch of the Scottish Socialist Party has "rejected" the advances of former SSP leader Tommy Sheridan to join his new party Solidarity.
Branch members announced yesterday (Tuesday) that after meeting this week they had unanimously decided to remain "full and active members" of the SSP as they prepare to campaign for the council and Scottish elections next May.
Shetland is the first SSP branch to discuss their future after members of the Highlands and Islands region met last week and decided by 13 votes to one to throw their weight behind Mr Sheridan.
Shetland branch chairman Kevin Learmonth said last night: "The SSP is a party with a strong and clear track record of fighting for justice and equality. You don't just throw that away because your ex-leader has gone off in the huff and formed his own party."
Island members had said the new party Solidarity was based on "charisma, shaky alliances, and playing second fiddle to London based organisations" and had nothing to offer Shetland, SSP members or the people of Scotland.
Mr Learmonth admitted that Mr Sheridan's high profile court case, when he successfully sued the News of the World for defamation, had impacted on the party, but said it was time to look ahead.
"We've had the personal fall outs, court cases and some people leaving the SSP, but now is not the time to look back. We need active branches, active members, vision and commitment. Now is the time to look forward and act accordingly.
"Council elections are coming up in May, and people are widely dissatisfied about the performance of many of the current councillors. People have been encouraging us to contest these council seats, and it's a request that we have to take seriously."
lies, damned lies and statistics?
“more swp lies- 2 easter ross and sgetland havent signed up woth the class traitors of solidarity”
From Socialist worker -
“Three branches in the region had already voted to join Solidarity en masse with three more to vote this week.”
So how does this make it ‘lies’ ? And how is either one of 2 SOCIALIST organisations a bunch of class traitors? Ramsey Macdonald was a class traitor - he crossed the floor and set up a national government with the Tories in the Thirties. Deciding you don’t want to be a member of the same left group as someone else doesn’t make you a class traitor FFS <oh, and learn to spell>.
"Just last week, a national opinion poll put the SSP on target to maintain its current parliamentary presence. The SSP is very much alive and kicking and will continue to lead the struggle for an independent Scottish Socialist Republic," the results were published recently but the poll was taken in august <i.e. before the split which didn‘t happen until September, and there is no indication as to whether there was a ‘new Sheridan type party‘ included in the survey> The poll, conducted for The Herald newspaper by TNS System 3, interviewed 989 people face to face across Scotland August 24th - 29th
“more swp lies- 2 easter ross and sgetland havent signed up woth the class traitors of solidarity”
From Socialist worker -
“Three branches in the region had already voted to join Solidarity en masse with three more to vote this week.”
So how does this make it ‘lies’ ? And how is either one of 2 SOCIALIST organisations a bunch of class traitors? Ramsey Macdonald was a class traitor - he crossed the floor and set up a national government with the Tories in the Thirties. Deciding you don’t want to be a member of the same left group as someone else doesn’t make you a class traitor FFS <oh, and learn to spell>.
"Just last week, a national opinion poll put the SSP on target to maintain its current parliamentary presence. The SSP is very much alive and kicking and will continue to lead the struggle for an independent Scottish Socialist Republic," the results were published recently but the poll was taken in august <i.e. before the split which didn‘t happen until September, and there is no indication as to whether there was a ‘new Sheridan type party‘ included in the survey> The poll, conducted for The Herald newspaper by TNS System 3, interviewed 989 people face to face across Scotland August 24th - 29th
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
nwnm said:
1) "All nine listed candidates who were selected earlier this year to stand in the Highlands for the SSP in the elections to the Scottish parliament next May have now joined Solidarity."
JimPage says this is not true - all nine have not joined Solidarity; Socialist Worker says it is. They can't both be right - who is telling the truth? Answers please.
2) while the statement that "Members of the Highlands and Islands regional council of the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) last week voted overwhelmingly to leave the SSP" is accepted as true by JP, the assumption that the majority of members will follow them into oblivion appears to be questionable - what is the actual situation among members as distinct from those on the regional council? Answers please.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
They're fighting over the Tea Fund now.
THE Scottish Socialist Party are being investigated following a complaint over funding.
Police in Shetland are probing the party's Highland and Islands branch after some members voted to end their relationship and transfer allegiance to Tommy Sheridan's new Solidarity outfit.
Their chairman Kevin Learmonth made the complaint and asked the Royal Bank of Scotland to freeze their account.
At a meeting on September 4, the SSP's Highland and Islands regional council voted to end their formal relationship with the party and affiliate with Solidarity.
Chief Inspector Malcolm Bell, Shetland's most senior police officer, said: "There has been a report made to us and we are conducting preliminary inquiries to establish whether or not this is a criminal matter."
Police in Shetland are probing the party's Highland and Islands branch after some members voted to end their relationship and transfer allegiance to Tommy Sheridan's new Solidarity outfit.
Their chairman Kevin Learmonth made the complaint and asked the Royal Bank of Scotland to freeze their account.
At a meeting on September 4, the SSP's Highland and Islands regional council voted to end their formal relationship with the party and affiliate with Solidarity.
Chief Inspector Malcolm Bell, Shetland's most senior police officer, said: "There has been a report made to us and we are conducting preliminary inquiries to establish whether or not this is a criminal matter."
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Fullyplumped said:
Those SSP members who are not joining Solidarity have the right to insist that the funds remain with the SSP - that was the purpose for which they were collected/donated. It is well known that one wing of Solidarity has in the past stooped to criminality in relation to managing funds it has the cheque book for.
Fisher_Gate said:
So if, say, a branch with 100 SSP members and a bank balance of £1000 saw 99 of them defect to Solidarity, all the cash should stay with the 1 member who stayed in the SSP? I think a split in the cash in line with the proportions of the split in the membership would be more in order.
Certainly something like that happened with some SA branches that I know of.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
mutley said:
The Socialist Alliance actually voted to dissolve, which is a completely different thing to a group splitting off and refusing to fight for their views democratically at a conference.
I know of one SA branch where members wanted to join two different organisations on dissolution and a split of funds occured reluctantly - this branch, not a million miles from you as well you know
actually passed a resolution noting:I had thought that the SWP supported this view and voted for it- presumably when it suits you, you feel differently now? Nice to know you are being consistent. I'd be interested to know if you have also changed your view that there is nothing inappropriate in forging signatures on cheques in a labour movement organisation?
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
There is a fascinating (well I think so) parallel between the travails of the SSP and Tommy’s splitters, and the split in the Free Church of Scotland over the past ten years or so. The question of who gets the money brought it all back to me.
Readers outside Scotland may not know much about this. Essentially the Free Church is a reformed Presbyterian church which resulted from splits within the estabished Church of Scotland in 1843 and then again in 1900. They are pretty fundamentalist – bible-literalist, very right wing over gay rights, quite left wing on poverty. They have much more of a presence in Gaelic speaking communities in the Highlands and Islands than in the central belt although they are active in Glasgow.
They have a theological college in Edinburgh, the head of which was charged with sexual assault and acquitted after a trial with bitter rumours about perjury. A group of ministers and many in their flocks began moves to split the Church and in about 2000 they set up their own denomination, which ended up being called the Free Church (Continuing). Essentially they took over some of the church buildings and sued the Free Church over the property. It took five years and massive amounts of money, and eventually Lady Paton (who also had a role in jailing Alan McCombes) gave a judgement against the splitters.
The judgement is very interesting if you like that sort of thing (and I do). There’s a nice quote in Lady Paton’s opinion from a 1952 case - "seceders secede at their peril". Obviously, churches are different things from trotskyite sects, but maybe not that different. Tommy and his merry men and women should not assume that the law will be on their side, and it will probably bankrupt them all should they be daft enough to test the issue in court.
Readers outside Scotland may not know much about this. Essentially the Free Church is a reformed Presbyterian church which resulted from splits within the estabished Church of Scotland in 1843 and then again in 1900. They are pretty fundamentalist – bible-literalist, very right wing over gay rights, quite left wing on poverty. They have much more of a presence in Gaelic speaking communities in the Highlands and Islands than in the central belt although they are active in Glasgow.
They have a theological college in Edinburgh, the head of which was charged with sexual assault and acquitted after a trial with bitter rumours about perjury. A group of ministers and many in their flocks began moves to split the Church and in about 2000 they set up their own denomination, which ended up being called the Free Church (Continuing). Essentially they took over some of the church buildings and sued the Free Church over the property. It took five years and massive amounts of money, and eventually Lady Paton (who also had a role in jailing Alan McCombes) gave a judgement against the splitters.
The judgement is very interesting if you like that sort of thing (and I do). There’s a nice quote in Lady Paton’s opinion from a 1952 case - "seceders secede at their peril". Obviously, churches are different things from trotskyite sects, but maybe not that different. Tommy and his merry men and women should not assume that the law will be on their side, and it will probably bankrupt them all should they be daft enough to test the issue in court.
Fisher_Gate said:The Socialist Alliance actually voted to dissolve, which is a completely different thing to a group splitting off and refusing to fight for their views democratically at a conference.
I know of one SA branch where members wanted to join two different organisations on dissolution and a split of funds occured reluctantly - this branch, not a million miles from you as well you know
I had thought that the SWP supported this view and voted for it- presumably when it suits you, you feel differently now? Nice to know you are being consistent. I'd be interested to know if you have also changed your view that there is nothing inappropriate in forging signatures on cheques in a labour movement organisation?
It didn't happen that way in practice in a certain branch... Once it became clear that the cast majority of people actually paying subs into the bank account supported respect the treasurer sent the money to London, in the end it was split between Brum respect and I don't know who else.
Once it became clear that the majority of people voting solemnly for the resolution you quoted actually hadn't contributed to the bank account the consensus evaporated.
And I've never seen anyone come out in favour of forging signatures on cheque-books. If someone once did, purely to get cash to where it was supposed to be (as was acknowledged) then that was very silly, and I'm sure they learnt from the whole sorry affair.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
mutley said:
North Birmingham Independent Socialists was the name of the organisation you struggle to remember. The whole story was recounted in the letters page of the Weekly W*nker if you care to revisit it, along with the resolution I quoted from that your comrades voted for back in those days of different principles ...
And the forged signatories case in the Socialist Alliance has been published on the internet - it took place over several months and involved three individuals and multiple cheques - it was not a case of 'needs must ...'. So quit trying to play that ridiculous line.
It was also kept secret and when attempted to be brought out into the open, the SWP tried to hush it up and accused those whose signature had been forged of 'witch-hunting'. The SWP member who was SA National Secretary stated that the practice of dishonesty was "a matter of convenience where we come from".
If you think it was 'very silly' and those SWP senior officials involved will 'learn from the whole sorry affair', perhaps you could explain how this could be, when the whole issue was hushed up and no account has ever been made to SWP members such as yourself - so how could you know except from sources outside the SWP? It says a lot about the way your organisation conducts itself in these matter. Those involved in Solidarity ought to be careful about who they put in charge of finances, though frankly I couldn't care less if the SWP lie to them too, as an organisation founded on gross lies to the entire labour movement doesn't deserve honesty from its members.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
junius said:
Slur? Nay, it is a well-establish truth that leading SWP members forged signatures on cheques payable to themselves.... has anyone denied it?
And Respect is not "Solidarity's English sister" and so long as it remains so, I'll continue working with the SWP. And the last people likely to suggest that it should become this are the SWP, as that would mean having to discuss this among the membership, not a prospect they would encourage.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
Nigel said:
No. It's all quite shameful on the part of the splitters really.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
osterberg said:
Not true - the Groganites/Rossites kept control of the office even though one of the IG members was guarantor to the mortgage. It took years to disentangle the liabilities and the threat of foreclosing on the mortgage by the rump, leaving the IG to bail it out was constantly present.
In any case the purpose of declaring a public faction/splitting was to defend the continuity of a british section of the Fourth International in the face of the attempt by the Groganites/Rossites to dissolve it. The subsequent evolution of the two anti-FI factions away from the FI reveals that this was not a premature assumption. Nobody seriously believes that the SA/Ross and the Communist League/Pathfinder groups seriously represent the continuity of the IMG - everyone knows that is the ISG, strengthened by the inclusion of the former WSL leaders.
The Fourth International was kept fully informed and the one thing the new group did was ensure that dues for the Fourth International were paid by the faction, something the Rossite/Groganite cabal were incapable of doing, squandering money given by members for the FI for their own factional escapades.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
nwnm said:fuck me, Osterberg, you've really opened a can of worms now! We've entered the world of 'The Life of Brian' I bet FG has got Trotsky's death Mask stowed away safely under his bed an' all
No but I once had two dolls for sticking pins in with the names JR and BG on them...
All of this 1980s shenaningans pales into insignificance compared to the criminal damage inflicted on one of the most successful left unity projects in Europe by the "splitters and wreckers" of Sheridan and his SWP/CWI erstwhile bedfellows.
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
Ah yes. Brian "Allah Akhbar" Grogan!!
charlie mowbray
The Enforcer
So how many is that, and what proportion of the entire Scottish membership of the SWP?q_w_e_r_t_y said:
Was thisepeated with the CWI as well, with some of their people deciding to stay in the SSP?
Fisher_Gate said:
I meant the revo offices , FG.That was the youth organisation.And I'm only going on what I was told at the time.
Don't know about the other stuff.Both sides fought dirty.I remember you're lot being in cahoots with the John Ross lot and actually taking legal action against the grogan lot (can't for the life of me remember why).
Grogan's lot and the American SWP weren't strictly speaking anti USFI.They were expelled from the USFI.They were anti the USFI leadership .
Not that this matters much any more and I'm definitely beyond caring.
I was just trying to make the point that this sort of thing has been going on for years.
I'm sure the terribly principled SSP you regard so highly will try to screw over
Solidarity and Solidarity will try to do the same to the SSP.
It is always the way in splits.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
osterberg said:
Grogan was expelled by the Ross rump SL, not the USFI. The American SWP left the USFI of its own accord.
I can't remember what happened about Revo - don't even recollect them having an independent office.
The SL office however definitely had a mortgage on it guarantored by an IG member. The IG wanted an alternative guarantor finding from the rump SL membership but they were reluctant to find another - the SL took the view that if they were going to go down financially, which became increasingly likely as they lurched from financial crisis to financial crisis, they were going to take the IG down with them. The IG took a decision that they would not allow an individual to be financially hit and that they would collectively meet any outstanding commitments in the event of foreclosure.
Eventually a deal was brokered through the FI but by then the Groganites and Rossites had fallen out and Grogan refused to allow the IG to relinquish their link with the SL's building. This is when the courts started to get involved but since it involved bourgeois property relations there was no alternative.
As part of the IG at the time I never regarded this as "fighting dirty". The IG did not wish to be responsible for the financial misadventures of a group it had no influence over, but was not interested in grabbing the assets (or more to the point, debts) of the SL. The IG sought to reach agreement through negotiation, and when this was not forthcoming, requested the FI act as mediators.
I presume you were the other side of the break and only heard one side of the story - given the subsequent evolution of the various components, only what is now the ISG emerges with any credibility, though it was an enormous setback that the other currents have disappeared into oblivion or secthood.
Having seen this once, I would have thought that you would agree with me that this sort of shambles should be avoided in future, especially as in the case of the SSP there are actually no political differences?
Similar threads
