Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 2:32 pm Post subject:

It was SSP, Solidarity and the Greens Amber, still at early stages so dont know the outcome yet. There has been a few meetings and they do have plans for more.

Why would Solidarity NOT stand candidates at elections? It wouldnt make sense. The left vote collapsed to 1999 levels as did the Green vote at the last elections, but we took the majority of that and made a good start. Why would we not stand on that basis? We took more votes than the other two left parties combined, the SLP came next with about 40% of our votes and the SSP behind that. We also were by far the largest vote of the left parties at the council elections.

Now, it could be, as I said, that the parties of the left will look at how to deal with elections but that sort of discussion has always gone on and always wil so I think that it is much more likely that we will will stand on our own right, as will the others.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

But at the last election, Solidarity hadn't been deserted by the SWP, Ruth Black hadn't defected. Solidarity doesn't meaningfully exist any longer. When's your conference, for example?

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:38 pm Post subject:

I see, I get you.

No the SSP lost their Glasgow councillor at the election, Solidarity lost ours after getting enough votes to get a councillor elected.

While I would want Ruth to remain in Solidarity, she is a friend of mine and I can appreciate her reasons even if I dont agree. But the voters in Craigton voted for a solidarity councillor so why would that be a reason not to stand again?

Solidarity have not been deserted by the SWP, you shouldnt belive the SSP propaganda Amber.

Our main conference is in November, why?

I now see why you said what you said Amber as you were basing it on the wrong information. The SWP are still there, still fully involved, probably currently the most influential group in Solidarity going by our last conference and we didnt lose the voters of Craigton, just the councillor.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

I stand corrected. I thought that SWP document attacking Solidarity and Tommy Sheridan indicated the SWP had left.

Anyway, it's pretty clear that Solidarity doesn't exist in any meaningful way now.

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 4:57 pm Post subject:

No, the leaked internal discussion document by an SWP committee way back last year was spun as a split by the obvious people who wanted to see it like that, but six months later they still play the same role. The SWP made it clear at the time that they remained committed to Solidarity despite some on the committee having criticisms about direction.

I remember when the SSP was a place where discussion and disagreement were considered healthy, we still consider that to be the case.

The thing is, The SSP have actually lost platforms, inlcuding the SWP and it seems that you didnt consider that to be the end of them. Even since the split to solidarity the SSP have lost the support of the RMT union and the SRSM yet no-one seemed to report that as the party collapsing.

I certainly hope that the SWP stay in Solidarity for a long time and I can see no evidence that they have other plans apart from wishful thinking from SSP members and hostile journalists.

jimtrot · No Longer a Wean Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 62

[quote="Rinty"]
But you might as well ask people how they would vote of the SNP didnt exist. Hypotheticals like that are a bit pointless.[quote]

but in the case of Solidarity, it is a bit more than hypothetical. eh, Rinty? Wink

_________________
Not Brit - 'S Albannach a tha mise.

The cause of Labour is the cause of Scotland and the cause of Scotland is the cause of Labour - apologies to James Connolly

Rinty · Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:14 pm Post subject:

Not really, Jim,no more than the SSP or the rest of the left.

We havent been going long so it is always hard to judge. Any predictions on how any left party or the left in generaL will do in the next few years would be silly.

Solidarity know that we can get a council seat elected in Glasgow (we lost the councillor, not the voters), we know we have members playing key roles in every trade union and we are still building.

The SSP, on the other hand, havent just lost the ones that went to Solidarity, many more left and didnt join another party. The SSP lost their only trade union affiliation which was, in my opinion, one of the main validations of their project. Another validation was that the SSP brought together the various left groupings in one alliance, that has also gone with only one main faction remaining, to the extent that they dont need a faction. I joined the SSP because it WAS a project that united the left, but they can no longer claim that and I wonder of that wasn't their raison d'etre?

I am sure it is all smiley happy agreement in the SSP right now, but by getting rid of the opposition you have lost 75% of your active membership and 90%of your vote.

Solidarity can, I believe, carry on that project, keeping the SWP and CWI in one group is part of building that along with the majority of members who are not part of any of those groups.

It mght be Jim, that we dont manage to build on the good start we have had, but that is as much to do with political developments in a wider sense than it is to do with the ability of solidarity to grow.

Interesting times ahead I think. Smile

RedScotland · Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 1:40 am Post subject:

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:56 am Post subject:

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

Hi Rinty,

What is the current, paid up membership of Solidarity?

Amber

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:18 pm Post subject:

Couldnt tell you exactly off hand Amber, I believe the membership who pay a regular monthly membership is about 600 maybe 700, it has been around that figure for about a year as far as I know. There is probably around half as many again who pay irregularly and are seen as members, if the local branches round my way are a yardstick. Then there are a hundred or so who are affiliated through Coalfields Solidarity. That's a trade union based branch who are semi-autonomous and pay a joint sum into the party rather than individual membership fees.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

Can't you be specific? You are the press officer, after all.

Rinty · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject:

I am one of the press officers Amber. Is this a press request? Smile

I was asked this by a journalist about a month ago and I gave him the last figure that I had which was 634.

I think I was quite specific, nearer 600 then 700. The others that I mentioned are members to an extent but the regular paying monthly membership is over 600.

Like all parties this will fluctuate, I will try to get an exact figure on the date you requested it if you want. Obviously I cant be specific on members who are not regular payers and are less active. I can find out the Coalfields affiliated membership if you want as I am a member, but that is not a direct solidarity membership, you had asked for paid up membership, those comrades pay to their branch and donate to the party as a group so it is not registered as actual solidarity memership apart from those who choose to also pay a monthly sub to solidarity.

Hope this helps.

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

Thank you. It's not a press request. I'm just curious as to how the Solidarity party is coping with its current crisis and whether members are deserting.

Rinty · Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 12:24 am Post subject:

If, by the 'current crisis' you mean the various police actions, then this is not a new thing.

No, members are not deserting, we have lost some members but also gained some.

youatethebabyjesus · No Longer a Wean Joined: 18 Mar 2008 Posts: 60

Amber · Nationalist Joined: 28 Feb 2008 Posts: 141

I see the evil old News of the World continues its campaign against left-wingers this week.

Oh dear, Rinty.