SOCIALIST UNITY

30 September, 2008

PALIN ON FOREIGN POLICY

Filed under: USA — Andy Newman @ 9:39 pm

New York Times plug for French left leader Besancenot

Filed under: Uncategorized — Derek Wall @ 7:57 pm

 

Saw this on Liam’s blog, looks interesting and encouraging, the LCR in France have committed themselves to ecosocialist politics which is encouraging to me!  Obviously the left in France are winning support.  On to NYT via Liam

This profile of Olivier Besancenot comes from the New York Times.

image HE looks like a sprite: boyish, handsome in his black Hugo Boss T-shirt and blue jeans. He reminds some of Tintin, the eternally young comic-book hero of so many childhood adventures.

But Olivier Besancenot, 34, is the extremely adept leader of the hard French left, a beacon for disaffected young members of the Socialist Party and the remnants of the once-powerful Communists. Having already run twice for the French presidency, and as an articulate presence on news and talk shows, Mr. Besancenot has higher favorability ratings in some polls than established politicians like Ségolène Royal, the Socialist Party presidential candidate who lost last year to the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy.

In the 2007 presidential election, Mr. Besancenot won 4.1 percent of the vote with the slogan, “Our lives are worth more than their profits.” But in the year since, as the Socialist Party has squabbled over its leadership and Mr. Sarkozy has picked off a few Socialist figures for his own cabinet, the young radical has become almost mainstream — serious surveys show that more than 60 percent of the French regard him favorably.

In a poll last month by the firm CSA, 49 percent of respondents said Mr. Besancenot was currently Mr. Sarkozy’s leading opponent, behind the Socialist mayor of Paris, Bertrand Delanoë (54 percent), but ahead of other Socialists like Martine Aubry (36 percent) and Ms. Royal (32 percent).

Mr. Besancenot is a postman, a member of the working class, who delivers the mail part time in the wealthy Parisian suburb of Neuilly-sur-Seine.

But he is also the leader of the Communist Revolutionary League, and in a long interview here, in party offices above a printing factory in this racially mixed city just east of Paris — where cheap clothing stores abut shops selling North African and Middle Eastern spices and take-out food — he describes himself without blushing as a revolutionary.

But given the travesties of the past, from the bureaucratic savagery of Soviet Communism to the chaos of Mao, he said, “revolution needs to be reinvented, for no revolutionary experiment has ever succeeded.” They have only been betrayed, either crushed by an armed elite or destroyed by “bureaucratic counter-revolution,” he said, adding, “We are trying to strike that balance of taking power without being taken by power.”

CAPITALISM is in a deep crisis, he said, “losing the leeway to buy social peace” in the massive credit crunch that began with subprime mortgages and has not finished. “This time it’s not on the periphery,” he said, but it “touches the heart of the system” and so has a domino effect, he believes. “This is a major turn in the evolution of the world economy.”

The credit crisis is pointing up further contradictions, Mr. Besancenot said. “We are heading straight for catastrophe from a social standpoint, the human standpoint, from war and the environment. For us, today, to be environmentalists means to understand that this model of socio-economic development is out of breath, and if we don’t change we will destroy our own planet.”

He is media savvy and understands that the name of his party, affiliated with the Trotskyist Fourth International, is wrong for the modern world, having a stink of dead ideology and the last bloody century. “We asked ourselves about finding a name based on what unifies everyone,” he said.

So he is trying to gather other small, left-wing parties into a new grouping: the New Anti-Capitalist Party, which is intended to provide an umbrella voting list for those unhappy with the impact of capitalism and globalization on the poor, the environment, the third and fourth worlds, and on the rights of women and homosexuals. The new party intends to run in the elections for the European Parliament next June.

“We aren’t soldier-monks,” he said. “We are the exploited, oppressed, the young and the salaried, who don’t whine but want to be respected — and for that, at some point, we lift our heads through engagement.”

Mr. Besancenot speaks quickly and fluently, dotting his answers with references to the philosophical canon of Marxism and post-Marxism, but he has a sense of humor, too, especially about revolutionary purity. Asked about the way human fallibility has ruined previous utopias, he said that serious change must come from below, not from a dictatorship of the proletariat, and that he believed in the protective guarantees of legal rights, decentralization of authority, local responsibilities and multiparty democracy.

The goal, he said, is “to find a political process that permits a revolutionary process to be controlled by its base — especially to not trust each other’s promises.”

“If we arrived tomorrow, saying that this time we have the guarantee that it won’t be messed up, we should definitely not be believed, even if we were sincere — which we would be, by the way.”

Mr. Besancenot was born in Levallois-Perret, near Neuilly. His father was a teacher and his mother a school psychologist. But he is sensitive about his upbringing. Teased about being a son of the academic bourgeoisie, he bristled, making it clear that his father taught in a primary school in a Communist neighborhood, and that his parents were salaried employees with “a working-class background.” Then he softened. “It would be no problem, by the way,” if they had been bourgeois, he said, then added: “My parents exploited no one.”

He was politicized by youthful violence and racism. “We had a friend, a buddy in the neighborhood who was attacked by someone who shot at him,” he said. The neighborhood mobilized, and “we young people went to be militant for SOS Racisme,” a group fighting prejudice. He joined the Revolutionary Communist Youth at 14.

He studied history at the University of Paris X-Nanterre, where the 1968 student uprising began, and then earned a master’s degree in contemporary history.

His goal, he said, is to try to define a new model for society that somehow avoids a permanent ruling elite. “Until now we’ve had two types of societies, we’ve had the bureaucratic societies in the East and we’ve had capitalist societies, and in both cases it’s a minority of individuals that decide for the majority,” he insisted. “We are for a model where the majority decides for itself.”

And how to motivate individuals, the great failure of socialism? “The only answer to motivate the individual in a different economic process would be democracy” in which there are “inalienable liberties,” he said, where the communitarian spirit cannot be violated either by the wealthy or the apparatchiks.

He said he admires Che Guevara, because of his “concentration on the individual” and not the collective. “We can find stimuli that aren’t simply material but are also moral in the construction of another society,” Mr. Besancenot said. “For Che, communism wasn’t just a phenomenon of production, it was first a phenomenon of conscience.”

MR. Besancenot is regularly mocked by more traditional French figures for his earnestness and naïveté, dividing the left to the benefit of the right. He is “the dream of Sarkozy who wishes him to be to the left what Le Pen is to the right,” said Pierre Moscovici, a candidate for the Socialist leadership, referring to Jean-Marie Le Pen, the leader of the far-right National Front.

As for this “mysterious anti-capitalist party,” he continued, “there’s no concern to look for solutions, no consideration of the world as it is.”

The contempt is returned. Mr. Besancenot calls the Socialists dupes of the system. “What they think is their biggest strength is their biggest weakness, the practice of power,” he said, “implementing right-wing ideas” and sacrificing principle for minor reforms.

Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the Green member of the European Parliament and a leader of the May 1968 uprising, says Mr. Besancenot remains captive to the past. “These comrades resist capitalism but they haven’t parted with” older notions of revolution, he said. But Mr. Cohn-Bendit may yet support the new coalition, which has been backed by José Bové, the anti-globalization campaigner.

The French are deeply pessimistic about the future, and what may attract many to Mr. Besancenot is his rejection of certitude. “My generation is full of doubts,” he said. “For me that’s not a problem, it’s almost better to have doubts than certainties. We don’t have a social project key-in-hand. We don’t have a New Jerusalem where we can go live.”

Founding Charter of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network

Filed under: Uncategorized — Derek Wall @ 6:45 pm

 

Thursday, 2 October, 11am

Crossroads Women’s Centre, 230a Kentish Town Road, NW5 2AB
(Entrance on Caversham Rd,  Kentish Town, wheelchair accessible)



 

The International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network (IJAN) is launching its founding Charter in continental Europe, India, Israel, Latin America, Morocco, the US, Canada and the UK.

 

For the past two years IJAN has been building an international network of anti-Zionist Jews to support Palestinian resistance and seed new Jewish anti-Zionist organizing:

 

Our commitment is to the dismantling of Israeli apartheid, the return of Palestinian refugees, and the ending of the Israeli colonization of historic Palestine.

 

Selma James, one of the international co-ordinators of IJAN, said:

 

We intend to contribute to a growing international voice that challenges Zionism and its claim to speak on behalf of Jews worldwide; and to contribute to the movement to defeat US-backed Israeli imperialism, occupation and ethnic cleansing.

 

The movement against Zionist apartheid must be as uncompromising as was the movement against South African apartheid. Anti-Zionism is part not only of the movement against racism but also the movement against war. We are convinced that we speak to a great unexpressed, in fact censored sentiment of support for this perspective, including among Jewish people.

 

Professor Moshe Machover, co-founder in 1962 of Matzpen, the Israeli socialist organization, said:

 

I welcome this initiative in the name of those Israelis who, together with their Palestinian comrades, are struggling against Zionist oppression and for the de-Zionisation of Israel and the establishment of a progressive commonwealth, in which Arabs and Israeli Jews live together in peace and equality.

 

Michael Kalmanovitz (IJAN) said:

 

We are challenging the common myth that Israel wants peace. Zionists deny the truth: that the state of Israel was established by its massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people and this continues to be its policy. We therefore join the movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel which the Palestinian resistance movement has called for.

 

The launch is part of a Month of Action < Confront Zionism – Divest from Israel > in a number of countries, to strengthen support for BDS by targeting Israeli goods.

 

The UK Charter launch the will take place on Friday, 24 October, 7-9.30pm, Trinity United Reformed Church, Buck St, London NW1 ( Camden tube). The distinguished Professor Moshe Machover will be one of the speakers.

 

   



INTERNATIONAL JEWISH ANTI-ZIONIST NETWORK

Email: uk@ijsn.net   website: www.ijsn.net

Convention of the Left - South London Meeting, Wednesday, 22 October 2008

Filed under: Uncategorized — Derek Wall @ 6:35 pm


thanks to comrade Caspell for this.

The successful Convention of the Left (CoL) in Manchester the week of the 20th-24th September agreed to encourage the development of local left forums. A number of us who were there thought we should explore the idea of building one in south London – across the boroughs of Lewisham, Southwark, Lambeth and Wandsworth.

The CoL was supported by a broad range of individuals and left organisations both in and outside of the Labour Party – including Tony Benn, John MacDonnell MP, John Haylett (Editor Morning Star) Salma Yaqoob (Respect) Derek Wall (Green Party), the SWP, the CPB, Socialist Resistance, Permanent Revolution and many others. The sponsors and initial statement can be found on the CoL website – www.conventionoftheleft.org

We are not trying to create yet one more campaign but rather provide a forum for discussion on the left, exchanging experience of ongoing campaigns and discussing ideas. As there seem few links between the above London boroughs, despite similar struggles going on in all of them, it seemed a useful geographical starting point.

We have a room booked for an initial discussion of ideas and see whether the people and organisations present wish to pursue the idea of a south London CoL. Please pass this letter or email on to anyone you think might be interested.

Date: Wednesday, 22 October 2008
Time: 7.30-9.30
Place: The Vida Walsh Centre, 2b Saltoun Road, Brixton SW2 1EP
(the centre is by Windrush Square, across the road from Lambeth Town Hall, 5 mins from Brixton Tube)

GURKHAS WIN RIGHT TO LIVE IN BRITAIN

Filed under: Nepal, immigration, army — Andy Newman @ 2:48 pm

News is breaking that former Gurkhas have won the court case giving them right to stay in the UK. This affects around 1500 people, who served in the Gurkha Rifles.

Last year the government changed the law to allow Gurkhas who had served in the British Army to live in the UK, and draw a full British Army pension, but in an extraordinarily vindictive and spiteful caveat they excluded those who retired prior to 1997, when the Gurkha regiment was based in Hong Kong.

 The Gurkhas’ solicitor, Martin Howe, speaking to the BBC says the case has dragged on for so long that seven or eight Gurkhas who applied for entry into the UK have already died.

Mr Howe represents around 1,500 men who wish to come to the UK, but says the government has been fighting “tooth and nail” to keep them out.

He sees it as a clear-cut case of discrimination, as the Gurkhas have not been treated equally, compared to other foreign soldiers.

Many of these elderly ex-soldiers are in hardship in Nepal, and need medical attention. They have each served 25 years in the British Army, and some 200000 Gurkhas fought for Britain in the two world wars.

Pictures from Richard Searle - former Gurkhas protesting outside the Labour Party conference

CHILD POVERTY TRULY SHOCKING

Filed under: children, London, Poverty Gap, Respect — Andy Newman @ 2:06 pm

Map of children in low income families

George Galloway today described the figures on child poverty in his constituency as “truly shocking”. The Campaign to End Child Poverty, an umbrella organisation for more than 130 including Barnardo’s, Unicef and the NSPCC, has produced research showing 5.5 million children in poverty in Britain. Bethnal Green and Bow has some of the highest concentrations of child poverty in the country according to the research, with some 79% of children (23,450) in poverty.

Mr Galloway explains: “I know the situation was very bad just from the many families who have come to my constituency in the gravest need. But these figures are a scandal and a disgrace. We have had 11 years of Labour government, which until now has been boasting of the unprecedented period of stable economic growth. We have the City on one side of my constituency and Canary Wharf on another where individual speculators have been walking off with tens of millions of pounds in bonusses. And yet here in the shadow of this wealth we have this terrible grinding poverty for those who should be looking forward to a bright future. ”

The poverty figures are very similar in Poplar and Limehouse, in which Canary Wharf falls and which has had a government minister Jim Fitzpatrick for the last 11 years.

Mr Galloway continued, “This poverty means that childen will be eating a poor diet, they will be cold this winter, there will be no money to buy books for them to read or space and quiet for them to read them. These are Victorian conditions which should have been banished from the 21st century. This is an appalling indictment of this New Labour government but Cameron’s Tories will be just as bad or even worse.

“I will be raising parliamentary questions to the government and seeking a debate on this issue at the earliest opportunity when parliament resumes next Wednesday. We need an urgent government plan, concerted with a council. There has been smug complaceny in Whitehall and the Town Hall but this has got to change. And the situation is destined to get worse with the gathering economic recession. More of my constituents are going to be cast into unemployment and low wages without emergency government measures to deal with the general economic situation. Again I will be seeking to put forward proposals for emergency government measures in the debate on the Queen’s Speech next week.”

Child poverty figures by constituency here

BANK ROLE FOR THE LEFT

Filed under: Nationalisation, economy — admin @ 1:20 pm

For public ownership of financial institutions to work, we must rid nationalisation of its historically wasteful image
by Gregor Gall

State intervention and nationalisation are both back with an incredible bang. Suddenly, the neoliberal orthodoxy of “Tina” – “there is no alternative” – to the free market looks as hollow as Brown’s promise to end the cycle of boom and bust. It reconfirms that in this age of hyper-globalisation and neoliberalism, the state and market regulation are still important.

The bail-outs we’ve seen in Britain and the US are nationalisations by the neoliberals and for the bosses. If they were carried out at the behest of the left and for the workers, taxpayers and citizens, they would look entirely different.

So when the senior management was changed when Northern Rock was nationalised one set of capitalist managers was merely replaced by another. The same will be true of Bradford & Bingley. The nationalisations were not to safeguard jobs or workers’ conditions or people’s savings but the British financial system upon which profits heavily depend.

If the left is to make headway right now, it must start getting its ideas about public ownership out into the media, into union members’ heads and onto people’s radar screens.

The left needs to start off with what public ownership is and what it is not. This would make it clear the left was not calling for a return to the age of nationalisation, where civil servants ran the industries in an undemocratic and unaccountable ways. Jobs were not safeguarded and services were often poor. It would also make it clear the left was not calling for a situation of a command economy, where the centre dictated what was produced without consulting the consumers and the localities.

The lessons of history are that while coordination and planning are needed, there should be decentralised structures that allow participation and that the process is one of bottom-up democracy, not top-down diktat.

One model of public ownership, for say, transport would be that the boards of management consist of a third of seats allocated to representatives from the travelling public, a third from the workforce and a third from the local authorities. Here, there would be a balance between producer and consumer interests.

The issues to be resolved would include whether the unions would be the only representatives of the workforce, whether businesses would be entitled to seats and whether local authorities are closely connected enough to be the genuine representatives of the public at large.

Another model would be that all members of the board of management would be elected directly by citizens and those wishing to be board members stand on platforms of representing workers’, business and passengers’ interests and so on.

These are all issues which can be explored in more depth later once the debate has been won on the need for this version of public ownership. The key thing here is that the primary purpose of these services (including financial services) being in public ownership would be that they are run on the basis of social need and not private profit.

What this means is that the constitution or articles of association of these organisations would be changed from the objective of pursuing private shareholder interests to providing services. The organisations would not then have to be concerned with chasing profits, market value, market share or being taken over by a rival.

The banks would then operate under this system by creating social justice and social inclusion by keeping open wide branch networks (with one in each community), practice safe lending, work by the principles of ethical investment and return surplus back into their operations to increase service provision.

The way in which the left can do this is by questioning each and every action of the governments by saying “Whose interests are being served by this?”, “Whose money is being used for this?” and “If public money is being used, where is the public control?”

There is a role for left MPs like John McDonnell in laying bills before parliament to put organisations into public ownership instead of allowing this Labour government to remain the bankers’ friend by doling out hand outs to them.

The unions need to use their influence inside and outside parliament to support these moves. Rather than being overly fixated on windfall taxes and curbing bonuses, they could tackle the underlying causes – rather than just the symptoms – by supporting social ownership. The odd call for public ownership of the utilities needs to be made writ large.

TIME FOR LABOUR TO STOP HELPING THE COLOMBIAN GOVT

Filed under: Latin America — Derek Wall @ 12:03 pm
 

Posted by Justice for Colombia | Date 23 September 2008

Companero Miliband!

Foreign Secretary David Miliband was urged to end UK military aid to Colombia during Labour Party conference in Manchester this year. Foreign Secretary David Miliband was urged to end UK military aid to Colombia during Labour Party conference in Manchester this year.

 

During a speech at Labour Party conference, union leader Gerry Doherty turned to British Foreign Secretary David Miliband to urge; “Companero Miliband, stop giving British military aid to those who kidnap, kill, torture and imprison trade unionists in Colombia”. The line was the culmination of a powerful speech delivered by Mr Doherty during which he explained why it was wrong for the UK to continue supporting the Colombian regime. His concluding point, aimed directly at the Foreign Secretary, was met with a huge round of applause from the thousands of delegates in the hall.

Doherty’s speech, which was widely considered one of the best at Labour conference this year, talked of how he had met the parents of three young union activists who had been killed by British-trained troops in Colombia and how he had sat with trade unionists locked up for over two years in Colombian jails without charge.

The speech came shortly after Ellie Reeves, a member of the ruling Labour Party National Executive Committee, had opened the international debate at the Party’s annual conference. In her opening remarks Reeves pointed out that the Foreign Affairs Select Committee of the British Parliament had recently described British military assistance to Colombia as “inappropriate”.

To see Gerry Doherty’s speech please visit this BBC website and, unless you wish to watch the entire debate, move forward to 1:17:30

THE CONVENTION OF ONE BUT NOT ALL THE LEFTS

Filed under: Convention of the Left, Manchester — Andy Newman @ 12:01 pm

vrrft1jjugkluqhwf7zisfh9tajz9nii0300.jpg

nhtlfppxzoyalblpfev3onyerj-qsihj0300.jpg

The Convention of the Left that recently took place in Manchester was an enjoyable and informative event for those that participated. As John Nicholson assessed it in his Guardian Comment is Free piece.

the Convention of The Left was brimming with new ideas, exciting debates and a vision of the world free from the tyranny of market forces. In our strong debates about how to reclaim our world from the spivs and the speculators, everyone agreed that we don’t need more war and privatisation, and that we are not going to punish the poor for the economic misery caused by the rich.

The convention was three things together – buy one and get two free.

1) Protest: Against the security bound city centre and the waste of public resources protecting Brown and co from the very public who have paid for this. Against warmongering, privatisation, failure to tackle environmental destruction, and inflicting the consequences of the crisis of capitalism on the victims. And crucially, against following (or even writing) Daily Mail headlines that legitimise the far right and leave open the door to the rise of fascists.

2) Alternative: Right next door to Labour’s official (non)event, a positive alternative – save the planet, stop the war, scrap privatisation. Not just a windfall tax but taking the utilities back into public ownership. Not just stamp duty holidays but extensive public house building (we don’t mean pubs, but we can’t necessarily trust councils who’ve sold off all their housing to be in charge of future homes for people in need). Not just cancelling the debts of the banks but cancelling student debt. Not just scrapping Trident but all existing weapons of nuclear madness (in the hands of the UK , US and Israel … er, not Iraq ). And using the savings to provide free public transport and free school meals – a fraction of the cost of PFIs in hospitals and academies. (Who said left ideas are dead?)

3. Unity: There’s nothing wrong with a talking shop, but we must unite across the left to win the ideological arguments for peace and public ownership.

This really was unprecedented. We all signed up to a statement of intent – creating local left forums to promote discussion and coordinate united action across the left, in an inclusive, participatory, pluralist, tolerant and democratic way. Sessions were free to enter, with no security and no queues. Debates were participatory, not top-down platforms. The whole thing was organised by local activists, without any major funding backer, big name or single organisation dominating. We are about policies not personalities.

Immediately there will be practical outcomes: first, a united campaign against fuel poverty, involving trade unions, MPs and local campaigns. Over the next year, we will work together to combine our different charters and petitions into one.

There were certainly positives, new working relationships forged, a good profile in the Morning Star, and a good turn out from Scotland. There was good debate that showed a preparedness to move beyond the sloganising. So as first step in a process it was good.

Socialist Worker’s. take on the event was more downbeat:

“The event had an impressive line up of speakers, including Tony Benn, and received widespread publicity. However, regrettably, it did not succeed in attracting the wider forces it hoped for. But there is a clear need for the left to come together in the face of the looming economic crisis. The key thing for activists is to get out on the streets, workplaces and colleges and build resistance to the crisis. It is out of this activity that new forces that want to create a political alternative to Labour will emerge.”

Actually, the SWP are slightly incorrect - the Convention of the Left did not aim at “attracting wider forces”, it aimed at creating a constructive conversation between the existing activist left. The existing activists cannot be simply leapt over, and even when new people do become involved in activity, their heads are not empty vessels waiting to be filled by the wisdom of the socialist groups - the new activists also have political ideas and belief systems. The old mantra, “it is out of this activity that new forces that want to create a political alternative to Labour will emerge.” is part of the tired old conservatism, that leads the far left to chase one protest movement after another on a never ending tread-mill, while the actual size and influence of the left declines year on year.

The Convention of the Left made a conscious decision to set its own boundaries with Tony Benn, John McDonnell MP and Jeremy Corbyn MP representing the most mainstream strand of political opinion included in the process. If the Convention idea is to move forwards, then it needs to move beyond these limitations to draw in those who wish to see greater social justice, and government action to combat poverty, but do not see themselves as part of the traditional left. In the same way that we cannot and should not ignore the existing activist left, despite some of their idiosyncrasies, we should not ignore those who see the election of a Labour government as indispensible, despite the compromises this entails. We need to fight for the widest possible political coalition that can unite around the ideas of changing the priorities of our society to better fit the needs of people, rather than the markets or capitalist institutions.

If the future of this initiative is able to bring together into dialogue the activist political left, the young people inspired to campaign over climate change, and the centre left seeking to develop alternatives to neo-liberalism within the Labour Party, then it could play a very useful role in reviving a new left. If however, it remains content to restrict itself so that John Mcdonnell represents the symbolic boundary then it may be much less fruitful.

Pictures from Richard Searle.

“CHILD M” MUST STAY

Filed under: Manchester — admin @ 9:33 am

Child “M” is an eight year old school child attending a primary school in Manchester . Child “M” was held in detention at Yarls Wood for 52 days this summer. There can be no justification for imprisoning an eight year old child.

Child “M” cannot be named for legal reasons.

Child “M” is here in the UK with his mum, brother and sister. Members of the family face persecution, and possible execution, if they are returned to Iran . They have been accused of posession of illegal literature, including circulating copies of Salman Rushdie’s book ‘The Satanic Verses’.

The British government has refused their asylum claim and recently tried to deport them. In July 2008 the family, including Child M, were arrested and imprisoned in Yarls Wood Detention Centre for over seven weeks.

As a result of substantial press interest, pressure from their legal team and the efforts of the Child “M” Must Stay Campaign, they have recently been released and allowed to return to Manchester . The family still face imminent deportation.

Child “M” and his family must not be removed from Britain and returned to Iran . It will simply be too dangerous and their safety cannot be guaranteed.

The family’s legal team is making challenges in the High Court. Keep your eye on the news.

But it is not enough to put their faith in the law. We have started a campaign:

Child “M” Must Stay!

What Can You Do?

Visit: www.childm.org.uk for information and resources

Sign the online petition:

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/child-m-must-stay.html

· Write to the Home Secretary

Please write to the Home Secretary. This is one of the best ways you can help the campaign. In it you need to:

- include Home Office reference numbers: G1158044, G1158044/2 and G1158044/7

- ask for the whole family to be given leave to remain

- say why Child “M” and his family would be in danger if they are sent back to Iran

- express concern at how Child “M” and his family have been treated

- send it to the Home Secretary, Home Office, 2 Marsham Street London , SW1P 4DF

Thank you in solidarity,

Emma Shaw on behalf of  The Child M Must Stay Campaign

(Comments are turned off for legal reasons)

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress