Students urge Burnham to shun Cambridge Union after Le Pen visit

February 19, 2013 4:46 pm

The Cambridge Universities Labour Club will be writing to shadow health secretary Andy Burnham urging him to withdraw from speaking in a Cambridge Union Society debate, in response to the society’s hosting of the French neo-fascist leader Marine Le Pen at an event today. The club urged its members to join a demonstration outside the prestigious debating society from this afternoon, to assert that “racism and fascism has no place in Cambridge”.

The Front National has already boasted on its website of the prestige of the Cambridge Union.

Andy Burnham – an alumnus of Cambridge’s Fitzwilliam College – is honorary President of the Labour Club, and they have urged him to pull out of an upcoming debate (entitled “This house believes that New Labour ruined Britain”).

We spoke to Burnham’s office this afternoon, who told us that no decision has yet been made on the shadow health secretary’s appearance at the Cambridge Union.

 

  • John Reid

    I recall Bernie grant, Ken Livingstone, Tony benn and Denis healey all getting heckled or threatening letters during the 87 election, In Hornchurch one of the heckles was An Unknown tory called eric Pickles, I’m sure the tories felt what Labour stood for was offensive to them, but to encourage censorship Is wrong, unless it can proved what that person is saying incites hatred or violence,

  • Dave Postles

    Ah yes, Oxbridge Unions – their members have always suffered from an excess of motions.

  • JoeDM

    Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

    • Alexwilliamz

      I don’t think you should be asking questions like that!

    • Brumanuensis

      Cambridge Union are free to invite Marine Le Pen. Cambridge Universities Labour Club are free to call for a boycott of the Union and the demonstrators are free to demonstrate outside. All of these things are an exercise of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not mean ‘you can do and say what you like without other people taking exception to what you say and do’.

    • Brumanuensis

      Cambridge Union are free to invite Marine Le Pen. Cambridge Universities Labour Club are free to call for a boycott of the Union and the demonstrators are free to demonstrate outside. All of these things are an exercise of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not mean ‘you can do and say what you like without other people taking exception to what you say and do’.

    • Brumanuensis

      Cambridge Union are free to invite Marine Le Pen. Cambridge Universities Labour Club are free to call for a boycott of the Union and the demonstrators are free to demonstrate outside. All of these things are an exercise of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech does not mean ‘you can do and say what you like without other people taking exception to what you say and do’.

  • Chilbaldi

    1. Wait… Cambridge has a union too? How come I’ve never heard of it before?

    2. Who cares what a student debating society does?

    3. Presumably Burnham shouldn’t speak in Parliament either, given that fascists have previously spoken there?

  • http://twitter.com/220_d_92_20 David Boothroyd

    Cambridge University Labour Club’s predecessor, Cambridge Organisation of Labour Students, used to have a policy of boycotting the Cambridge Union entirely. I remember voting to overturn it in about 1993. If I remember right the reason for the boycott was because the Cambridge Union membership fee was unaffordably high, and the Cambridge Union didn’t do enough to distinguish itself from the Cambridge University Students Union.

  • Brumanuensis

    I’m generally ambivalent about no platform policies. On the one hand I don’t think they do much to stop the spread of fascism, given that the audience targeted by fascist parties rarely frequent Student Unions. On the other hand, the glib ‘if we debate them, we’ll expose their shortcomings’ doesn’t hold much water either. Richard Dawkins generally refuses to debate with creationists, for the very sound reason that he won’t persuade them and by debating them, he can only make them look more credible. So on balance, Burnham should boycott.

    • Hugh

      He’s not being asked to share a platform or debate them. He’s being urged to boycott speaking in the same venue because it will have hosted Le Pen. On this principle he’ll also have to boycott the Oxford union, and any union or organization that’s ever given a platform to anyone from the far right – presumably hardline islamists and such too.

      Of course, the threat that Andy Burnham won’t agree to attend their venue at a later date might make organisers nation-wide pause before they invite such controversial figures in future and thus serve some purpose. However, I wouldn’t want to bet on it.

      • Brumanuensis

        I wasn’t specifically commenting about Burnham, more making a general point about no platform policies and their merits (limited, in my view).

        “On this principle he’ll also have to boycott the Oxford union, and any union or organization that’s ever given a platform to anyone from the far right – presumably hardline islamists and such too”.

        Fair enough.

      • Brumanuensis

        I wasn’t specifically commenting about Burnham, more making a general point about no platform policies and their merits (limited, in my view).

        “On this principle he’ll also have to boycott the Oxford union, and any union or organization that’s ever given a platform to anyone from the far right – presumably hardline islamists and such too”.

        Fair enough.

    • Hugh

      He’s not being asked to share a platform or debate them. He’s being urged to boycott speaking in the same venue because it will have hosted Le Pen. On this principle he’ll also have to boycott the Oxford union, and any union or organization that’s ever given a platform to anyone from the far right – presumably hardline islamists and such too.

      Of course, the threat that Andy Burnham won’t agree to attend their venue at a later date might make organisers nation-wide pause before they invite such controversial figures in future and thus serve some purpose. However, I wouldn’t want to bet on it.

  • KonradBaxter

    No platform is a foolish policy that achieves nothing.

    Let them speak, let them make fools of themselves, let them be exposed.

    The BNP hardly did well out of their Question Time appearance did they?

  • LordElpus

    If it’s okay to ban someone from the far right from speaking then surely it’s okay to ban someone from the far left.

  • markfergusonuk

    The Cambridge Union / CUSU thing was still a problem when I was a student 10 years ago too

Latest

  • News Scotland have voted No to independence, say LabourList readers

    Scotland have voted No to independence, say LabourList readers

    In a few hours time, we will find out that Scotland has voted against independence – according to LabourList readers, anyway. 77% of those who took our survey this week said they thought that the outcome of today’s referendum would be a No vote. Despite polls have closed in over the past fortnight, our readers are confident that Scots will have chosen to preserve the Union. 23% think that the result will be in favour of Yes. Only two polls in […]

    Read more →
  • News Lift cap on borrowing so councils can build – say Labour PPCs, councillors and AMs

    Lift cap on borrowing so councils can build – say Labour PPCs, councillors and AMs

    A group of London-based Prospective Parliamentary Candidates, councillors and London Assembly Members have written an open letter (published in the Guardian), calling on party leadership to go further in their policy commitments when it comes to building houses. Although the letter praises Ed’s pledge that the next Labour government “will build 200,000 homes a year by 2020″, the cohort which include urge leadership to commit to lifting what they deem the “arbitrary cap [placed on councils] on borrowing to build”. […]

    Read more →
  • News Are Labour going to make the NHS the focal point of the 2015 campaign?

    Are Labour going to make the NHS the focal point of the 2015 campaign?

    Earlier this week, a poll found that Labour hold an 18-point lead over the Tories as the most trusted party on the NHS – the only topic voters consider a “major issue” that sees a Labour lead. The NHS being a crucial issue of the Scottish referendum, with both sides accusing the other of lying. Many of today’s votes rest on whether they trust Yes Scotland or Better Together’s claims about the health service. Now reports say that Labour are considering […]

    Read more →
  • Comment We stand up for human value – we proudly defend the Human Rights Act

    We stand up for human value – we proudly defend the Human Rights Act

    If you’re part of the Labour Party, or hold any similar values, you will certainly share the absolute belief in respect and dignity for everyone. I don’t think anyone in our movement, with our principles, would disagree. And so, with those common values, we are entirely right to stand up, loud and proud, for the Human Rights Act. The publication this week of Human Rights: Reflections on the 1998 Act by Jonathan Cooper in Stephen Hockman’s Law Reform 2015 (with […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Scotland Friendship and solidarity must prevail, as the fog clears

    Friendship and solidarity must prevail, as the fog clears

    The air hangs thick this morning with the referendum. Last night a deep fog rolled down across Edinburgh, but in reality it is the campaign which has blotted the vision and stopped even the keenest of observers from seeing what lies just a few footsteps ahead. The final days has provided one crucial clarification though – the No campaign is capable of great passion and powerful rhetoric. Mocked, endlessly criticised, a reputation dragged through the muck. Despite it all – […]

    Read more →