You are here: Home » News »

Unison General Secretary Dave Prentis weighs in on GMB/Progress row

June 18, 2012 12:35 pm

Tags:

Share this Article

According to the Guardian, Prentis said:

“Progress seems like a party within a party. Our affiliation is to the Labour party. We don’t expect an organisation to be allowed to grow within it.”

The Guardian also suggest that Unison would back a motion attempting to “outlaw” Progress should one be brought to Labour Party conference.

Related posts:

  1. The GMB and Progress – what happened, and what might happen next?
  2. Is Labour’s General Secretary refusing to budge?
  3. Unison release pension “infographic”
  4. New General Secretary Iain McNicol addresses conference
  5. An open letter to TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber
  • jaime taurosangastre candelas

    I wonder if any of these unions have taken a poll of their members’ views before ganging up with the bully boy tactics?  Or is it only the opinions of the full time barons that count? There seems to be an awful lot of talk from the unions about democracy, but little is published to prove that it actually happens.

    • John Ruddy

      As a UNISON member, I agree there should be an investigation of Progress, and it should be more open and democratic. Our delegates to Labour Party conference will no doubt be mandated (ie by their members) to vote according to that mandate.

      • jaime taurosangastre candelas

        Yes, but have you been balloted yet?  Your union leader is quoted explicitly by the Guardian journalist as saying that the union will support the GMB motion (which also does not appear to have consulted the members).  I have no problem with the unions backing this sort of motion, if that is what the members want, but it would seem fair to at least ask the members first.

        • treborc1

          Can I ask you as a porter, what would you like the ballot on.

      • ROB SHEFFIELD

        What percentage turnout?

    • treborc1

      http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/contents

      I hope you enjoy it, everything a Union does is controlled by law and regulations laid down by the 1992 governance.

      heavy reading mind you.

  • Andy Hopkins

    I dont understand what is wrong with getting view points from all areas of the Party if we dont we will end up in opposition for years. We have to listen and take stock of all view points, thats what a democratic party does.

    • http://twitter.com/mistyblulabour dave stone

      “getting view points from all areas of the Party”

      That’s fair enough. But does anyone know who’s ‘views’ Progress represents? Is there a requirement to donate x thousands of pounds before having input on Progress policy? Does Lord Sainsbury have the last word and if not are there any Progress policies that are opposed by him? The same goes for the Progress structure – are officers appointed from on high or elected democratically by a one member one vote process?

      Progress is an influential body, and possesses all the structure of an independent party, it is important for us to know what and who we dealing with.

      • john P Reid

        the structure of an independent party, It doens’t even have candidates the way some people are Co-op/labour, it doens’t give A donation to laobur for in return votes on leaderships, selecting M.P.s or the NEC it doesn’t dictate policy, why stop at progress what about, Compass or tribune,it doesnt ut up it’s own candidates against labour ones, and how would A union that aswell as funding labour also funded Socialist labour like the NUM feel if it was said to the NUM they couldn’t back labour anymore.

        • treborc1

          Yawn History

          • john p Reid

            Haven’t you heard acoording to new labour hsitory started on may the 1st 1997.

    • aracataca

      Quite right Andy. Pluralism isn’t a weakness-it’s a strength. Long may it continue.

  • http://www.facebook.com/siobhan.omalley.737 Siobhan O’Malley

    The entire labour movement and the vast majority of the membership are opposed to Progress, who are a threat to the health of the Labour Party.

    • http://www.facebook.com/matthew.blott Matthew Blott

      I take it you are opposed to pluralism then. Also, if they’re so despised why are the unions making such a fuss about them? 

    • jaime taurosangastre candelas

      Do you have any evidence of this opposition, or are you projecting your own opinion onto millions of others?

      • treborc1

        Millions of others have you any proof of that.

        • jaime taurosangastre candelas

          Yes.  8.6 million voted Labour at the last election, and there are 6 million unionists, some of whom may support parties further to the left.  Isn’t that what Labour always try to portray as the  small “l” labour movement?

          I know your comments are often throwaway one-liners, but do you ever stop to think before putting finger to keyboard?

          • derek

            You can’t just throw a couple of figures up and relate it too the motion? besides! your an anti trade union person and take a biased view on trade union business. 

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            Derek,

            there is a very simple statement by Siobhan O’Malley.  It’s written in language even you can understand, but does not include any evidence to support the statement.  I ask for evidence.

            Maybe you don’t see the link, but other people will.

            As for being biased, yes, I will admit it.  I am biased in favour of this country getting back to growth, not in favour of what those disgraceful socialists who run the unions do for their own narrow self-interest at the expense of the country.

          • derek

            Just by stating the number of votes labour had at the last G.E. and the number of trade union members isn’t some kind of random link to the motion over “Progress” you see? in plain language. there isn’t a democratic link between “Progress” the trade unions and the labour party.

            So where in your infinite wisdom do you get the idea that the trade unions oppose growth. You condemn the trade unions but say nothing about Baroness Warsi or the self serving conservatives in general.

            Jaime, you can mock me all you like but I’m a father and a member of a community and I believe in the distributions of wealth and fairness and I also believe in the rights of trade unions to negotiate better terms and condition plus protect and defend their workforce, so go ahead and rip the crap out of me because I have to buy my food from a lesser source than you do and although as a family we eat our fish on a friday it may not contain the freshness you can afford so excuse us if we seem a bit behind your larger brain.

            P.S. would you like to just execute people of my ilk.

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            Derek,

            it’s quite simple.  According to Labour party thinking, there were in 2010 a minimum of 8.6 million people who believe in what it calls the “labour movement”.  Probably more, given that the 6 million union members do not all vote for Labour, and that the small “l” labour movement has always been wider than the Labour Party.  For instance, the RMT are not affiliated, but are part of the labour movement.

            So when Siobhan declares that “the entire labour movement” is opposed to something, I would expect to see some evidence that 8.6 million or more people agree with her.  Maybe she has taken a personal poll of all labour movement members.  She does not say.  She has been on LL for a couple of weeks, has an entirely valid point of view, but does appear – to me at least – to throw in unevidenced comments and then chooses not to come back to defend the comment.

            As to the rest of your writing, what can I say?  You and I have no knowledge at all of each other’s eating habits, or the proportion of our budget we devote to food.

            And no, I would not agree with your p.s.

          • derek

            Do you honestly believe that the RMT support “Progress” I’d say that a proportion of labour party voters aren’t even aware of the “Progress” issue and most certainly the majority would oppose an organisation muscling it’s way into the selection process  and funding mechanics of the party.

            I believe you once told us you shopped? correction your wife’s shops at Waitrose and Sainsbury’s and often over spends on shopping, expensive wines and cheese being the most  potent force of spending, I also believe that you once told us that you often hold dinner parties with fine cuisine on tap, I also believe that you once made a remark about your culinary skills and choice of cooking methods and costly hand picked meats with latin flavoured spices . Your more than to keen to give your earning potential and often bragg about the standard of life you maintain.I think it’s important to outline your thoughts and lifestyle because there a judgement on your opposition to the normal way of life for millions of labour voting people.In short your in the progressive camp. 

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            I don’t suppose for a moment that Bob Crow and others in the leadership of the RMT support Progress – that’s only an assumption of course based on where I perceive both groups to stand politically.

            If you really want to know, my wife and I take it in turns to do the food shopping, and each of us has our own income, as do millions of families in the country.  She spends a lot, I don’t.  I spend a lot of time flavouring food by hand, and on preparation, because that is the way I was taught to cook.  I have 4 wood pigeons hanging in my shed which I am going to casserole, but only when they have been dead for 4 days and achieved a proper flavour, and each will take about 20 minutes of preparation.  They were free, shot by my neighbour’s son.  You do not have to spend much money to eat well. I was taught about wood pigeons which are very good eating by my father-in-law, who shot one on a walk we took on his farm. He pulled the feathers off the breast, cut off the two fillets with his pen-knife, and we had them flash seared with some garlic and oil in a sandwich within maybe 20 minutes of the bird last flying. Fantastic.

            Let’s just engage on the argument, as opposed to what you may assume of me and I of you.

          • derek

            OK, I’ll skip the Hannibal Lecture line. However my view that life-standards often intertwine with political flavour or favour.If we extend the argument we could bring in the now coalition government, where it’s clear that there is  wide spread disagreement from true tories and lib/dem, it’s also spread through the liberals hall of unity with the social democratic part causing real friction and agitation. I’d link up the situation with the “Progress” situation, which tends to swerve to the right of the labour party and doesn’t hold any grounds to claim parity with the trade unions nor any sense of electability rights within the labour party movement. It’s an organisation being created without the consent of the real labour party members wishes and if left unchallenged could create the same type of disagreements we have witnessed within the coalition government and the lib/dem pact. er I’ll reiterat 

          • jaime taurosangastre candelas

            Up to the top Derek.

          • treborc1

            This from a pratt who moans about Union stands up for Progress and I doubt has voted labour in their lives.

    • mightymark

      A pretty sweeping statement! Your proof?

    • Hugh

       Just the entire labour movement and vast majority of the membership? Surely all of right-thinking Britain and left-leaning opinion across the world. If we are going to use imaginary evidence in support of our arguments we must dare to think big!

    • http://twitter.com/robertsjonathan Jonathan Roberts

      Evidence please?

      • http://www.facebook.com/siobhan.omalley.737 Siobhan O’Malley

        Easy.

        New Labour is dead, according to Miliband.

        New Labour lost 5 million overwhelmingly working class voters.

        In my CLP, Blair and austerity is reviled.  The same applies to my union branch. The politics of New Labour (spin, war, privatization) is despised.

        Now we see firsthand, ‘moderate’ trade union leaders coming out against this Blairite faction.

        The reality is that you have lost the argument for centre-right politics in a working class party.  The labour movement is united against the politics of Progress.

        The PLP are slow on the uptake, but they will get it in the end.

        It’s time to accept that.

        • Chilbaldi

          I’d love to go to your CLP then, as that’s the first time I’ve ever heard of a CLP where Blair is universally “reviled”.

          Moderate union leaders? There are lots of moderate members in these unions, their leaders not so much.

          Tha Labour movement is not united against Progress. Most (like me) don’t really care about Progress and view it as an increasingly irrelevant part of the party.

          We don’t need your horrible, divisive politics in the Labour Party. Change the record or go away please.

          • Dave Postles

             Give over.  You criticise her on the grounds of vagueness of numbers, but then respond with ‘Most (like me) …’ without any evidential analysis.  The primary principle of the Labour Party should remain (as in its origins) to advance the cause of the working class.  Blair, following Major, wanted to disguise the notion of a class-based society – post-class.  For a time, it was a seductive argument, but time has revealed its emptiness and vacuity.  It’s time for working people to become a class for themselves rather than merely in themselves.  Middle-class tossers like me (although with origins in the working class) can by all means (re-)join the Labour Party, but on the understanding and with the intent to advance the cause of the working class, whether in work or out of work.

        • john P Reid

          New laobur lost 5 million votes, but it also increased Labours vote from 8.4 million to 13.6m so that’s 5.2 million up on 83 Old laobur decreased albours vote from 14 million in 1951 to 8.4m in 1983 so Old laobur decreased lalbours vote by 5.6million

          Where’s your CLP siobhan, East london somewhere, I recall East ham had trots trying to infutrate in 2001, and Stephen timms isn’t exactly old labour, I know the Newham North east lot are quite ‘progressive’ the idea that one constituency doens’t like Blair means tehy all do is daft, i don’t kno wif it’s your a laobur strong hold and My constituency has only once ever had A labour M.P ,but they maybe disagree with you elsewhere is becuase it was under Blair that it’s the only time we ever one in Middle england. and my CLP most of the members are working class.

          • John Dore

            Great numbers John. In 74 Wilson got 
            11,645,616.   Dave Postles would you like to comment on these? Perhaps you Siobhan?

          • Peter Barnard

            Great numbers, my backside. The electorate was 3.7 million more in 1997 than it was in 1974.

            Try these numbers :

            in 1966, Labour/Wilson received 13.07 million votes from an electorate of 36.0 million ;

            in 1997, Labour/Blair received 13.52 million votes from an electorate of 43.8 million, ie + 450,000 votes from nearly 8 million more electors.

          • John Dore

            Peter your numbers prove nothing. Lets look at the share of the vote. Why dont we look at percentages

            1970 43.10%    Wilson1974 37.20%    Wilson1974 39.20%    Wilson1979 36.90%    Callaghan1983 27.60%    Foot (Falklands)1987 30.80%    Kinnock1992 34.40%    Kinnock (fighting a tired and sleazy Tory Government)1997 43.20%    BlairThe point that John Reid makes stands ie that a return to the left yields poor results see 83, 87 and 92. Suggest you pick up a selection of HMSO publications and enjoy the content. No interest in your backside either.

          • John Dore

            Re post of the numbers due to loss of formatting.

            1970    43.10%    Wilson1974    37.20%    Wilson1974    39.20%    Wilson1979    36.90%    Callaghan1983    27.60%    Foot (Falklands)1987    30.80%    Kinnock1992    34.40%    Kinnock (fighting a tired and sleazy Tory Government)1997    43.20%    Blair

          • john p Reid

            and in october 74 labour got 11,451,000, and gaitkell got nearly 13 million in 1959 and lost, it was 2 party poliis in teh 60′s remember the Liberals only got 1% of the votie in 1951 and all the others got less than 1% and there was 80% turnouts then too. 

          • Dave Postles

            Yes, immense attractiveness of Labour in 1945-50.

      • Dave Postles

         If the leadership of Unite, GMB and Unison is opposed to the interests of Progress, it would seem to comprehend a substantial part of the ‘labour movement’, since the ‘labour movement’ consists of those in unions and union organization.
        Progress, Mandelson and their associates would be better concentrating on executive remuneration in recent years rather than criticising the unions, which have been fairly patient and responsible (as witnessed by the developments in the UK motor construction industry for BMW at Birmingham and Oxford, Vauxhall at Ellesmere Port [contrast Bochum], Nissan, and JLR, one of the most vibrant sectors of the UK economy at the moment). 
        The unions are the ‘labour movement’, a role seemingly abrogated by the Labour Party in the recent past.

  • ROB SHEFFIELD

    The Labour party has never been a class-based party- it has always been a democratic parliamentary party that tries to reach out to all sectors and strata.

    The  insipid sectarianism of the GMB/ Unison and their lackey cadres (to use thier own lingo!)  is what destroyed us in the 70′s and 80′s. This is being raised now because the left leadership think they have their best chance in a generation to secure a leftist platform for Labour (and the ‘inevitable’ landslide victory from the masess blah blah blah copyright 1983).

    But the two Eds and most of the front bench grew up on that diet of disaster created by the left the last time it had any meaningful influence over Labours agenda.

    It ain’t gonna happen ;-)

    • Daniel Speight

       The Labour party has never been a class-based party- it has always been a
      democratic parliamentary party that tries to reach out to all sectors
      and strata.

      Nothing to do with what I think about Progress or whether I agree with action against them, but are you sure the above statement is correct historically? To me the base of the Labour had always been working class. As a party it came about to defend unions in parliament. That others from outside of that class have always been welcome is not in dispute.

      On the other hand maybe you start counting Labour’s history from a slightly later date; 1994 for example.

    • http://www.facebook.com/siobhan.omalley.737 Siobhan O’Malley

      Isn’t it a class party by virtue of its relationship with the trade unions?

      • John Dore

        How about a quote from the about us section of Labour web site….

        “united by the goal of changing the British Parliament to represent the interests of everybody.”

        I really dont like your divisive class war BS.

        • http://www.facebook.com/siobhan.omalley.737 Siobhan O’Malley

          I don’t share your optimism. Unfortunately ‘class’ is still relevant. Despite Labour governments we remain a deeply divided society. In fact, New Labour didn’t even fail to take on the rich & power, it sadly increased inequality.

          If you don’t like the word ‘working class’, or even ‘class’, then that’s your problem. The important point to remember is that the Labour Party was set up to represent and defend the interests of the working class through parliament. (This is not to say, however, that those from other classes are incapable of having compassion or expressing solidarity with the working class).

          I believe Labour should represent the majority, the working classes. If you think that’s BS, that’s your opinion.

          • John Dore

            Having lived through Foot and to a lesser degree Kinnock I fear that your approach is doomed to defeat. The working classes know that left often talk a good game but cant deliver as its a one sided approach. That’s why the the left cant carry an election. 

            So you carry on with your class war, their will be a few that listen, but the PLP dumped it a long while ago. My only hope is that the GMB and their friends don’t tear the party apart.

  • Duncan

    Can’t help feeling people are walking into a trap here.  A (fairly random) attack on Progress will be defeated, giving the current leadership the sort of “Clause IV moment” that they really don’t need (but some of their advisors will think they do need), will strengthen Progress, weaken the unions and weaken the left.  Much more constructive for unions to talk to the left about producing a nice glossy left-wing magazine to get out to all CLPs…

    • Duncan

      Of course it isn’t going to end with either of those things.  What nonsense.  It will end with some obscure motion relating to the rules around internal Labour pressure groups being debated at the 2013 Labour Conference, with a lot of sound and fury and pretence that it is something significant.  It will then either be passed (having no impact on Progress at all, but probably being used to curtail activities of most other groups) or defeated and somehow presented as some defining Clause IV moment, weakening the unions and the left a little for whatever comes next.

      Of course, this doesn’t matter much to you as you don’t support the Labour Party, and would like to see the unions and the left leave (which won’t happen).

      • Duncan

        The above comment was supposed to be in reply to Delroy Booth’s comment about parting of the ways.

  • http://twitter.com/DelroyBooth Delroy Booth

    Well it’s either gonna end with the Blairites leaving to join the Tories or Lib Dems, or the Blairites forcing the unions out of the Labour party once and for all.

    Question is, which side are you on?

    • treborc1

       Yes your right but will the Unions demand the  few quid they have given in Loans back, will labour  have enough cash left over from the £11 million in interest payments to even run an election, I’m 100% for all Unions leaving labour.

    • Chilbaldi

      absolutely hooey.

      it will end with either some of the beligerent members of the labour left getting together with the rest of the party and working towards government, or those same beligerent members buzzing off.

  • John Dore

    For all the bluster here we all know what’s really going going on. This is an attempt by the Unions to take control, its a coup. The Union leaders who wield a disproportionate amount of power are driving their agenda to move the party to the left. The ejection of Progress is significant in its symbolism. Its a clear signal to the centre ground that you are not welcome anymore. Even if this is at the expense of electability.

    Union membership is dwindling.  You have to look at what Mandelson said about the purpose of Unions. membership continues to decline from 13.2m in 79, down to an average of 7.8m through 1997 to 2008. Well now its at 6.4m.  The point though is that Unions need to concentrate on less on ideological politics and more on offering their members something they value.
    The commentators supporting the move are the left wingers. They are arguing against the reasonableness of debate in favour of their ideology and classwar.What’s at stake is huge, as Miliband says he wants the party to be a bigger party and not to exclude. I believe the Unions want a party that represents Union interests only.I don’t know this represents in terms of core vote but it will not deliver an election victory. It’s daft.

    • AlanGiles

      “You have to look at what Mandelson said about the purpose of Unions.”

      He is  hardly an expert on unions. Or anything, apart from schmoozing, toadying and lining his own pockets.

      • John Dore

        Typical Partridge response, ignores all points made and has to comment on the personality that he despises.

    • Any L Nitrate

      Tight, warm, well lubricated, enclosing velvety warmth. Lurvely.

  • jaime taurosangastre candelas

    Derek,

    Progress is not the only organisation within / alongside / associated / affiliated to the Labour Party.  There are unions, the Co-op Party, Fabians, all of those affiliated socialist societies and so on.  Most of them are single focus, or at least narrowly focussed.  They all have their own source of funds, either subscriptions or donations, small or big.

    Progress has a particular point of view – call it Blairism for short, or purple or whatever.  What is it about Progress that calls down so much hatred from other factions?  They still campaign for a Labour victory and contribute ideas to the Labour policy committees. It seems that some people – and at the moment it is individual union leaders – who have decided that Progress is so alien to them that the organisation must be expelled.  So far, from what I see in the papers, there is no democratic audit trail to support this within the unions, it is merely the opinion of some important individuals.  

    And yet, the unions are not the Labour Party, although they are highly interwoven and symbiotic.  The Labour Party can reject any motions.  Indeed, the Labour Party could consider expelling a union from affiliation, although that seems unlikely based on the financial support of the unions.

    • derek

      I’m not convinced “Progress” has warranted the collective badge of being an affiliate.It’s seems some form of order from the Blairite faction intent on legacy and reform.Someone made the call earlier in another thread for Blair just to let go and accept his time has gone and been, I think that notion should extend to all die hard Blairites, new labour had some success but the overriding feeling is that new labour failed, lost touch with it’s core values and principles which resulting in new labour losing it’s  long hard fought relationship with the peoples of Scotland and many areas throughout the United Kingdom.

      “Progress” is the left over of a poor unrepresented body of reformist who missed a wonderful opportunity to re-establish and build an industrial Britain.No one is going to listen to Blair nor Mandelson and those who remain in the shadow cabinet often get their reflections from this site by being voted the poorest MP’s on a list of favoured  labour MP’s

      • jaime taurosangastre candelas

        That all seems at odds with the majority of the PLP, and some very senior figures in the Shadow Cabinet remaining Blairites, and the leader himself defending Progress’ position in a speech a couple of days ago, speaking to their conference, and letting his spokesman indicate that some technical or rules method would be found to avoid the GMB motion at all.  As an outsider, what I perceive of the Labour Party is that the people who hold power in it are desperately trying to remain close to the centre.  No doubt they like the union money, but they do not like the union “agenda”.  That’s merely how it appears to me as an observer.

        As you know, I am neither hard left nor a member of the Labour Party.  But if I were, I would wonder whether all the Labour Party do is to take my subscription money and use it to pursue outcomes I don’t believe in.

  • Hughes

    Idiotic policies /decisions fron brown and Blair have cost the UK dearly, the Labour party died when Blair became leader and I do`nt want my subs to be paying for a party that wants to put me on the dole !.

Latest

  • Comment Planning the revolution – Labour and the Spending Review

    Planning the revolution – Labour and the Spending Review

    By David Robinson

    In four weeks time the Chancellor will announce the results of the 2015 spending Review. There won’t be many winners but some will have lost more than others. Political commentators and discussion forums will pass judgement and public sector managers will, yet again, pick through the debris, making do and mending from what ever they can salvage. Before we get overtaken by the detail we should reflect on the bigger picture. What ever the chancellor says on June 26th it [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment A call for action at the G8

    A call for action at the G8

    By Ivan Lewis

    In less than a month’s time, the UK hosts the G8 Summit. With hunger, tax, trade and transparency all on the agenda, the UK has a unique opportunity to show global leadership on these issues. The scale of hunger is devastating. There is enough food in the world for everyone, yet 1 billion people still go hungry. 2.3 million children every year die from malnutrition – to put that in perspective, that is around 16,000 children every day. Or one [...]

    Read more →
  • News TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run – Media roundup: May 24th, 2013

    TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run – Media roundup: May 24th, 2013

    Subscribers to our morning email get the best of LabourList – including the Media and blog round up – every weekday morning. If you were a subscriber you would have already received this in your inbox. You can sign up here. TUC suggests Football World Cup vote should be re-run “The TUC along with its international equivalent – the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – is calling on UEFA to address the appalling treatment of workers and players in Qatar and [...]

    Read more →
  • Featured A Northern Tory that Labour should be afraid of

    A Northern Tory that Labour should be afraid of

    By Mark Ferguson

    The Labour Party spends a great deal of time beating itself up over its performance in Southern England. We know it simply isn’t good enough, but we can’t seem to put our finger on why exactly that’s the case. Is it demographics? No. Culture? Perhaps. Lack of basic party organisation in some areas? It’s certainly a factor. But whilst we’re flagellating ourselves over our inability to perform south of the Watford gap (outside of London), we should remember that the [...]

    Read more →
  • Comment Featured Why we love Woolwich

    Why we love Woolwich

    By Jon Wilson

    Woolwich is an amazing place. It’s where the Labour party was founded as a mass membership organization. The Woolwich Provident was one of Britain’s first building societies. The Royal Arsenal Coop one of our first cooperative societies. Woolwich had the second Polytechnic in the country, created with the aim of providing education for working adults. Woolwich is my nearest big town centre, where I shop and go to meet friends. In the last few days, for many people, its name [...]

    Read more →