Saturday, February 13, 2010

Who will put members first?

With every candidate seemingly claiming that they are about putting the members first it's worth looking at who can really claim that?

Paul Homes?

The bloggers supporting Paul seem thrilled by the support he's getting. But not from ordinary UNISON activists through their Branches, Regions, Service Groups, etc, but from one Labour MP? That doesn't sound like putting the members first. Or how about Paul's track record on the NEC? Paul failed to even complete his first term on the NEC, choosing to resign rather than sitting with the NEC at Conference were delegates elected by members in their Branches hold us to account as their NEC. Sound more like putting your own interests first rather than the member.

Roger Bannister?

This one is even more cut and dry. Roger is the candidate of the Socialist Party, a revolutionary party who operate 'Democratic' Centralism. For those not in the know this means that he is at the behest of the Central Committee of the Socialist Party. His candidacy itself is all about promoting the Socialist Party and their agenda rather than about winning. That is clearly why the Socialist Party have even refused to work with other extreme-left groups in the election, it's all about them and their sectarian interests. UNISON members and our interests don't seem to come into it at all!

Dave Prentis?

Dave's support does not come from outside parties or cults, but from UNISON members. Dave's website details the members the ones working in our public services, the stewards working on the ground, the Branch Secretaries leading local organising, and UNISON's lay leaders at Regional and National level.

Dave's nominations and endorsements are coming in from across the union; Branches, Regions, Service Groups, the Retired Members, Young Members, Self Organised Groups and of course the National Executive. At all of which he's been supported by UNISON activists and shop floor public service workers that know Dave's record of working hard for our members and always fighting for our interests first and foremost.

That's why I'm backing the candidate that puts members first: I'm backing Dave Prentis


Anonymous said...

Quite right, James. Bannister is a busted flush - three time loser and a supporter of a party whos desire for 'revolution' are simply out of touch with real people.

Holmes bandwagon seems to have stalled entirely - he knows he's on a loser (you can see that from the glum expression he wears in the hilarious video of him with McDonnell). And if he's so keen to demonstrate his platform as a man of the people, how come you can only post a comment on his blog if you are 'a member' of the blog?

So much for the 'UNISON United Left' - UNISON UN-TIED Left, more like.

It's Prentis all the way - and with any luck the other candidates won't get the necessary nominations to mean an election is necessary. Dave would win an election hands down whatever the case, but we could sorely do with that money being spent on organising and recruting more UNISON members.

Anonymous said...

Genial dispatch and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Thank you on your information.

Anonymous said...

Early on in the debates the UUL were having there was talk about not even standing a candidate and seeking to win concessions from Dave P for doing so. I must confess to being somewhat surprised by such a mature line of argument, but it made sense to me. So what have we got now? Three lefty candidates who will either end up with not enough nominations between them, or just enough each to see the left vote split wide open.

It's clear Bannister won't pull out, so if Holmes does the gentlemanly thing and does withdraw we get an election about whether the union is led by a supporter of 'views repugnant to a civilised society and which remove the human rights of the individual', or Dave Prentis who has the experience and genuine groundswell of support to make him the winner by a country mile.

I think the UUL should seriously reconsider the value of forcing an unnecessary election. It'd do their image no end of good as mature and forward-thinking activists, and it'd be their chance to get the current leadership to commit to some of their agenda.

Anonymous said...

Wheel's definitely off the Bannister wagon - Health SGE just agreed to nominate Dave (22 votes to 3 - the 3 usual suspects for Bannister), and Holmes wasn't even considered!

How is it that someone with the hubris to stand for General Secretary doesn't even rate a mention by the leading members in Health?

Anonymous said...

Very damaging data on Holmes claims about membership density in Kirklees at

Proves he's on 58%, not 85% as claimed. 58% is respectable - absolutely, even if not as good as the best - but 85% is just a lie.

Anonymous said...

I see the National Women's Committee have endorsed Dave. I am led to believe that Jean Thorpe proposed Bannister but there was no seconder - which is funny in itself.

But, as the NEC have taken a collective decision to back Dave already, how can NEC-member Jean Thorpe then go to a committee of which she is a member only because she is on the NEC and propose someone else? Where's the collective responsibility?

Anonymous said...

Hilarious! Jon Rogers puts up a post about the GS election on who is afraid of answering questions and when asked what were the revolutionary lunatics SWP going to get out of backing Holmes - answer came there none!!!

Anonymous said...

The concerted smear campaign against the people standing against Prentis is disgraceful. There appears to be little or no mention about where they stand. Oh and James you are no better for describing those who support Holmes or Bannister as being in a cult-how on earth does that advance the debate?

Anonymous said...

So how come Jon Rogers won't answer what the SWP are getting out of backing Holmes? They know Holmes can't win, so he can't offer them a slice of the UNISON cake. Maybe - and it's only a rumour as yet - he is thinking of jumping ship to their party?

Bill said...

Dave's support does not come from outside parties or cults, but from UNISON members.

Except, of course, the Labour Party, and it's entryist cult.

Anonymous said...

More embarrassing news for Unison...they also kick people off their FB group for even daring to criticise Prentis.

Anonymous said...

Don't vote for James Anthony! Vote for the nice lefty people instead.

Hollie said...

Don't vote for James Anthony! Vote for the nice lefty people instead.