LEFT UNITY ON SCOTLAND?
From Democratic Green Socialist, which is the magazine of independents within Solidarity, Tommy Sheridan’s party in Scotland.
EDITORIAL: Given the importance of building left unity in Scotland, DGS holds over our editorial on developments from the last issue. We believe that the views it expresses are correct, despite cynicism expressed in certain quarters. We also believe that discussions have been taking place across Scotland on the way forward on this issue. For instance, a socialist forum involving wider left forces has met in Lanarkshire, and there are plans for a similar initiative on the ground in Ayrshire. We also have reason to believe that significant figures on the left from a trade union background, independently of Solidarity or any other party of the left, may announce an initiative soon. DGS will post news as soon as we have it.
Left Unity initiative should be welcomed
‘These are undoubtedly times of crisis, but a time of crisis can also be a time of opportunity. Working class people in Scotland and across the world will face increasing pressure as the crisis deepens. A renewed left must be there standing shoulder to shoulder with these (extra) ordinary folk, defending them from attack and helping them defend themselves.
But this is also the time to be spelling out the case ‘for a newer world’, for a new and reinvigourated socialism, shorn of the errors of the past and claiming democracy, liberty, science, and the environment as our own, as well as the more traditional territories of workers rights, social ownership, anti-imperialism and wealth redistribution.
All socialists, but particularly pro-independence socialists, need to make this crusade their common cause. And they will call on thinking people with a conscience everywhere to join them.’
The Bubble Bursts by Steve Arnott
The Daily Record and Daily Mail carried a story on Tuesday 9th December which sent shock waves through Scottish left politics. ‘Tommy flies the Red flag of truce’ went one headline.
The gist of the story was that, at the launch of Solidarity’s new pamphlet on the economic crisis, The Bubble Bursts, Tommy Sheridan had said that, given the huge attacks faced by working class people due to the economic crisis, and the consequent challenge to the left, it would be ‘irresponsible’ for any left organisation not to seek maximum unity in action, in both the electoral and campaigning spheres - regardless of his and others personal circumstances in relation to ongoing perjury proceedings. Tommy went on to say that he hoped leading left trade unionists in Scotland would ‘bang heads together’ in order that one unified socialist candidate could be presented to the electorate in any given constituency in the forthcoming general election, whether in 2009 or 2010.
No one yet appears to have ruled such a possibility out - though some internet comments to the effect that this, once again, shows that Solidarity are a one man band, were wide of the mark. The facts are that there had been a number of informal discussions within Solidarity on the question of how to take the situation for the left in Scotland forward, and that, at a well attended and representative National Steering Committee of Solidarity on Sunday 7th December a resolution from Tommy Sheridan was passed unanimously that set this process in motion (see link below).
It would be wrong to give the impression however, that it was only internal discussion within Solidarity that gave rise to this new dynamic – senior left trade unionists in Scotland have also been holding discussions independently around the question of working class political representation and moves towards left unity. This in itself raises the possibility of wider forces being involved in any unity project than were involved in the initial socialist alliance project which led to the SSP of 1998-2004.
Democratic Green Socialist online magazine welcomes this development unreservedly. Particularly, we welcome the sense of the Solidarity NSC meeting of the Sunday 7th December that any moves towards left unity in Scotland cannot exclude the SSP. This does not mean that, in any way, we withdraw our criticisms of the actions of the current leadership of the SSP in relation to the Sheridan defamation case. However, it does mean that we realise that compared to the current objective social and economic conditions, such considerations are secondary.
The recent Ballochmyle council by-election in Ayrshire shows what can be achieved with the right candidate and the right campaign, and what could be built on by the left where there is only one left candidate on the ballot paper. Solidarity candidate Danny Masterton came fourth with 7% of votes cast. A similar vote across the country on the 2nd vote for a Holyrood election would have seen 8 socialist MSPs returned to the Scottish Parliament.
Is such a thing possible in the future? Yes. Is it desirable? Yes - if all of the left has the courage to learn from the tragedies of the past.
Tommy and the others who still live under the shadow of legal proceedings, who have wholeheartedly backed this initiative, deserve a big pat on the back. They have been willing to indicate that, whatever awaits them personally on the legal front, they are prepared to put the objective interests of working class folk first. We salute them, and we say to all on the left in Scotland – and particularly the pro-independence, green left – a door has been opened.
For our part, we hope you will decide to enter.
Democratic Green Socialist do some excellent work to promote ecosocialist ideas and I would recommend their publications.
I am hoping that despite different organisation affliations ecosocialists groups can talk to each other, certainly Green Left members down south are generally happy to dialogue with other ecosocialists…when it comes to campaigning there is much common work to be done, building the campaign to elect Jerry Hicks, for example, is something all ecosocialists can get involved with at present, despite being in different political parties.
Comment by Derek Wall — 21 February, 2009 @ 11:03 am
As I understand it, there is an upcoming council by election in Dundee where the SSP are the only left party standing. Will DGS be recommending a vote for Angela Gorrie ?.
Comment by Jim Carroll — 21 February, 2009 @ 11:22 am
Are DGS still defending a convicted rapist by going on about how the girl he was convicted of raping was known for her loose, un chaste ways?
Comment by Lynsey — 21 February, 2009 @ 3:15 pm
“Democratic Green Socialist, which is the magazine of independents within Solidarity”
Any word yet on whether they have smaller fleas, and so on ad infinitum?
Seriously and non-sectarianly, I guess this is all to the good; it’s certainly better than continuing hostility. But it is a bit have-cake-and-eat-it - “in a spirit of left unity we call on you to join us, although we still think you’re wrong and deplore your sectarian attacks”. Let’s see if the Dundee by-election also shows “what could be built on by the left where there is only one left candidate on the ballot paper” - maybe after that all sides will feel like talking.
Comment by Phil — 21 February, 2009 @ 6:12 pm
Oh come off it - the reason Sheridan is suddenly so interested in ‘left unity’ is because he and his wife are in serious danger of going to jail for perjury.
Come the trial Mr and Mrs S will attempt to reprise their roll as bombastic martyrs. The more people on the left who join in this chorus of cant, the better for the Sheridans.
The wisest thing that socialists can do now is cut them loose and leave them to swing (pun intended).
Comment by Clark — 21 February, 2009 @ 8:25 pm
In response to Lynsey (#3), yes DGS are still publicising their defence of convicted rapist Chris Wiles. There is a new article on their website. The use of the most reactionary and sexist arguments is absolutely shameful.
Comment by James N — 22 February, 2009 @ 9:25 pm
“The Daily Record and Daily Mail carried a story on Tuesday 9th December which sent shock waves through Scottish left politics.”
Leftspeak for nobody raised an eyebrow or cared a jot.
Comment by the fog of war — 22 February, 2009 @ 9:36 pm
6, I just read said article- knowing nothing of the case at all. There is not a trace of sexist or reactionary argument within it- it is a brief, factual (I assume) report.
This is a difficult area but are we to say that it is perfectly legitimate to campaign on behalf of any victim of a miscarriage of justice (murder, robbery, abduction etc.) other than in cases where the alleged crime is of a sexual nature?
If that is the case, then perhaps we could equally dispense with juries or defence lawyers or right of appeal in such cases too?
Comment by RobM — 22 February, 2009 @ 10:43 pm
My comment about DGS members’ abhorrent stance on this case is related more generally to their campaign in defence of Chris Wiles, rather than this specific piece. I suggest you read their previous articles on the matter, as well as the response from Rape Crisis Scotland.
I’m not arguing that I wouldn’t defend someone who was a miscarriage of justice.
Comment by James N — 22 February, 2009 @ 11:16 pm
@ RobM
Not sure about the article, but you do know how difficult it is to prosecute a rape case yeah?
I’m being conservative here, but few rapes are reported, only about 10% of those reported go to trial, and about 10% of those lead to a conviction.
Comment by Frank Martin — 22 February, 2009 @ 11:17 pm
few rapes are reported, only about 10% of those reported go to trial, and about 10% of those lead to a conviction.
Not quite that bad. In England and Wales, at least, about 1 in 8 rapes are reported to the police; about 1 in 5 of those go to trial, and about 1 in 3 of those defendants are found guilty. Multiply it out and you get a ratio of about 120:1 between rapes which women believe has happened and rapes for which a man is convicted. (Source: British Crime Survey 2006/7, which I was reading this afternoon for tedious work-related reasons.)
Comment by Phil — 22 February, 2009 @ 11:35 pm
im a supporter of the swp in dundee and yeah i’ll be voting for angela gorrie as will every other head screwed on socialist.i’m highly critical of the SSP but the need for the left in scotland to find common ground is paramount.
Don’t any of you pricks get that?……………..
Comment by graham — 23 February, 2009 @ 5:15 am
#12 Graham; so why did you split the existing united socialist party then ya dobber ?
Comment by Mr Benn — 23 February, 2009 @ 7:45 am
10, I know, but that wasn’t really my point- and surely DGS are not campaigning against ALL rape convictions, Are they? There seems to be some unsophisticated trolling going on against a group (DGS) I have never heard of before and any stick is being used to beat them. Posts like 3 and 6, are just thrown in out of the blue and quite irrelevant to the call for unity in the article itself- the idea being that their position on a specific justice case somehow puts them beyond the pale.
Comment by Billy Goat Gruff — 23 February, 2009 @ 7:52 am
Yes, the printing of aspersions against a rape victim’s character - on that basis that she allegedly had an STI - does put DGS beyond the pale. That is my opinion, it is not trolling.
#12: I am glad to see common sense prevailing for once on the Left. It was disappointing that Solidarity chose to stand against Morag Balfour in Glenrothes recently, so it is progress if the SWP are now acting on their stated policy to co-operate with other Left forces and back the most viable socialist candidate in elections. I think it would be wise for you to not undermine that by calling people pricks.
Comment by James N — 23 February, 2009 @ 5:04 pm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/tayside_and_central/7906389.stm
922 cases of rape and 27 convictions in 2006/07 in Scotland.
Of course there are miscarriages of justice every day however I would give caution to any miscarriaqge of justice campaign about a convicted rapist on the basis “he seemed a nice man” or “everyone who knew him said he was a gentleman” etc.
The discussion about the rape case is actually a different discussion (an important one but a different one). But since gender etc was such an issue in the split, I believe I can understand why some SSP member s are on their high horse about the case, but this is a discussion about left unity.
If the DSG are serious about left unity that would be good but how do they propose to take it forward, my understanding (I might be misinformed) due to the pending court case that it may be difficult for the SSP and Solidarity even to talk to one another even on a informal basis. Who else on the left are Solidarity meaning to discuss with for electoral pacts? The SLP perhaps? Its a bit hard discussing electoral pacts with people who you may have bail conditions not to talk to, I would hazard a guess.
Good luck though in their project after unity of the working class is woefully needed.
Comment by Fanny Adams — 23 February, 2009 @ 7:42 pm
#15 - there is no viable left candidate in this council by-election. the SSP candidate is not known in the area, doesnt live there and has no record of any record of work in the area at any level. They will get the token 1 or 2% of the vote that any unknown candidate would get and it will progress nothing on the electoral field for socialists. It will be a toal waste of time and money.
Comment by Mary Brooksbank — 23 February, 2009 @ 8:21 pm
15- the article from DGS is here: http://www.democraticgreensocialist.org/wiles.htm
Presumably this is the ‘new article on their website’ you mention at 6 but there is no mention whatsoever of “aspersions against a rape victim’s character - on that basis that she allegedly had an STI”
Comment by RobM — 23 February, 2009 @ 9:27 pm
#18 The victim’s sexual health is mentioned in the orginal article. See below:
http://www.democraticgreensocialist.org/archive2/chriswiles.htm
Comment by Fanny Adams — 23 February, 2009 @ 10:50 pm
I’m prepared to concede the possibility that Chris Wiles may be the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
However the fact that the Democratice Green Socialists is made up of people who were either gullible enough to believe or happy enough to cover up Tommy Sheridan’s lies makes me very very sceptical.
Comment by Patrick Scott — 23 February, 2009 @ 10:59 pm
#13, cos it was never going to be united, it was focused on electoralism not relating to the wider movement.In the end, the future would be sectarian in-fighting as sheridan predicted.
17# you may be correct but the election is here whether the left is prepared or not. what it shows is the need for the left in scotland to up its game. What form of co-operation or organisation emerges is up for discussion.
#20 oh save me from your bourgeois morality. i’d rather stand with sheridan for all his faults than those who stood with Murdoch in a kangaroo court.
But then we all have our crosses to bear. The question is how to move on. The need for marxist politics have never been more urgent.
Comment by graham — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:31 am
#21 “those who stood with Murdoch in a kangaroo court”
Who chose to go to this “kangaroo court” you speak of?
Who opposed instigating action that would lead to a case being heard in this “kangaroo court”? Who went to jail to oppose evidence being presented in this “kangaroo court”?
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 24 February, 2009 @ 6:20 am
-21.
Just to clarify, Graham, it was your hero TS who instigated this court case. He’s no socialist.
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 8:30 am
Marie - #23
Maybe you could clarify what a socialist is. Who qualifies in your opinion?
Comment by John Wight — 24 February, 2009 @ 8:53 am
I think that unless comrades raise their game a little, I will close this thread.
With prosecutions looming it is impermissible to discuss the NOTW libel case, or its background here.
Comment by Andy Newman — 24 February, 2009 @ 8:56 am
-24. Someone with integrity, for a start, John.
-25. Andy, it’s impossible to discuss the issue of socialist unity in Scotland without factoring in the matter to which you refer.
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 9:08 am
I would suggest that the above comments regarding the Free Chris Wiles campaign have much more to do with the fact that I, the author of the original article, am a friend and supporter of Tommy Sheridan than anything to do with the campaign. The bitterness and bile politics of my ex comrades in the SSP are the politics of hate towards Tommy and anyone around him and seem to blind the persons of any intellectual capacity. The childish behaviour of these people continues from sending I and other women in our old party out Samaritans flyers with our newsletters to trying to sabotage web sites we set up to refusing to share megaphones at public meetings. I feel sorry for them and their infantile behaviour.
Chris’s campaign is also supported by Miscarriage of Justice Organisation Scotland run by Paddy Hill (of the Birmingham 6) and John McManus but of course my ex comrades do no like them either as they both support Tommy.
I wish my ex comrades no harm, I am not driven by hatred, and I do hope that none of their partners, sons, father’s or friends are falsely accused of rape. To witness someone’s life being torn apart by a false allegations and a judicial system that does not address miscarriages of justice but merely rubber stamps mistakes and defends their own is a heartbreaking experience. Thankfully Chris has the support of his small community who know both sides in the case and know the truth of what happened that night. Our fight is with the judicial system not the women who made the false allegations against Chris and we would have never used the derogatory words that Lynsey alleges to describe his accuser.
The women good men bad ideology of my old comrades is naïve in the extreme and to accuse me of supporting a rapist is a disgraceful statement which unfortunately does not surprise me given that it comes from ex comrades who are blinded by hate and have lost the ability to debate intellectually and in a friendly capacity. I am so glad that in Solidarity everyone is treated with respect and every voice is listened to whatever side of the argument they are on. I do hope that for the future of socialist unity in Scotland my ex comrades can open their eyes to a wider perspective than their unhealthy obsession with Tommy Sheridan.
Chris has been refused parole as he continues to protest his innocence and will stay in prison for his full term rather than admit to a crime he did not commit. The campaign to support him will continue until his name is cleared.
Comment by Anne MacLeod — 24 February, 2009 @ 9:09 am
#21 “#13, cos it was never going to be united, it was focused on electoralism not relating to the wider movement.”
Well seeing as the proposal under discussion here is purely focused on electoralism then it leaves you looking a bit stupid does it not ?
Comment by Mr Benn — 24 February, 2009 @ 9:21 am
Sheridan is no hero of mine, i’ m well aware he brought the court case, and no i don’t think that was a good idea, the man clearly has an ego the size of scotland.Just didn’t think i’d see other socialists facing him in the court room.
However its time to move on. 28# i do think its important the left has an electoral strategy but electoralism is not going to be the whole ball game.Capitalism is in crisis.the marxist and non marxist left has to come up with some answers.
Comment by graham — 24 February, 2009 @ 10:26 am
-29, so, those others should have gone to jail for refusing to appear in court?
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 10:37 am
I think the DGS have been wrong on the Free Chris Wiles campaign from the start and have made it worse as it went on.
I would not have published the article in the first place due, as has been said earlier, to the inclusion of references to the woman herself. Campaigning by using STIs and drinking habits as a weapon adds a very real danger of discouraging women who have been raped from coming forward.
After the article was published the correct thing to do then, in my opnion, would have been to publish the right to a reply from Rape Crisis which was published in the next issue. BUT, they also gave the Chris Wiles campaigners a right to reply to the Rape Crisis reply.
The latest ‘update’ is extremely one-sided, with no chance of the reader getting the arguments on the other side of the hearing.
The Chris Wiles campaign should make these arguments on their own web-sie, that could be reached by anyone interested after reading the original article, and the DGS shouldnt make it one of their own campaigns, in my opinion.
I am not a member or connected in any way to DGS. And I understand that they publish articles clearly stating that they dont necessarily represent the views of the DGS.
However, this does not mean that I have any idea or opinion, one way or another, on whether this guy has been treated fairly and if he hasnt been then his friends are right to campaign for him to get fair treatment.
On Left Unity, I think it is hilarious for people to interpret a unity of left parties to be based on one party, if announcing a candidate first, getting dibs on the whole left vote and campaign. That wont work at all. So the talk about the parties standing against each other is irrelevant in the wider question. For an SSP member to suggest that Solidarity stood against Morag Balfour is pointless given that the same logic says the SSP stood against the Solidarity candidate.
Neither of them could claim to be the viable candidate, Solidarity had a disastrous result and the SSP fared much better but still had, I am led to believe, their worst ever Westminster by-election result.
The lesson from Glenrothes is that neither the SSP nor Solidarity were best placed to take on the mainstream parties in that contest, left unity cannot be contained in such a narrow definiton of just the SSP and Solidarity.
Thankfully, from what I hear, the idea of a left electoral format is taking wings and developments are taking place daily that will, inevitably, lead to this.
Whether you see it is a short-term stop-gap move, a new beggining, a step to a workers party, or whatever, no socialist party is in a position to deny the voters a left alternative at the forthcoming elections.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 1:27 pm
The idea of a left electoral initiative succeeding until after the court case is ludicrous.
Depending on the way it goes, certain people will find it impossible to participate. You, Jim, for example, will never be trusted again if your man is convicted.
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:10 pm
You mean that I wont be trusted by you, or even that you will encourage others not to trust me.
That, marie, is irrelevant in the wider picture. You might want to attack a few individuals but a left electoral alternative will have to happen soon and the court cases and the follow-ups will not be over before the euro or the westminster elections.
There has been significant steps forward even in the last few days, the people involved will not be distratced by issues like whether you trust me or not.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:15 pm
-33. What follow ups?
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:25 pm
Whatever follow-ups that come after the cases, if they go ahead.
There is the NotW appeal and possible appeals on the perjury trial from either side.
The issue of Tommy and the various legal episodes will not be resolved before the next elections.
Only people who see ‘left unity’ as a narrow picture of a merger between Solidarity and the SSP could refuse to embrace the current intiatives. Its not about parties folding or merging or surrendering, its about creating an alternative for voters at the next elections.
They are happening and something concrete will emerge from the talks, I am sure of that. We should all get behind it and leave the court stuff outside of it.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:36 pm
If the accused are found guilty, there will be no appeal re the initial defamation case. that verdict will be set aside as a matter of course.
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 2:47 pm
Surely that depends on what is involved in the indictment and what the charges are, and if those aspects were relevent to the decision to the jury decisions. I am sure you dont know enough to be sure of that conclusion.
Again though, this is irrelevant to the issue in hand. A left electoral arrangment cannot be held back by this court case and it would be foolish to suggest it should.
I assume you are an SSP member?
I know that all SSP members dont share your view and do want to see some sort of initiative work, even if you would rather stay focussed on what divides us.
BTW, back to the original artcle by Steve - in the Ballochmyle by-election it was 7.5% 1st pref votes for Solidarity, 18.6% of 2nd preference votes and 15.5% of 3rd preference votes. He points out that this was partly due to fielding one single socialist candidate.
I dont think it is as simple as this as, even recently, we have seen how a divided list of candidates can sometimes total more votes than one single candidate.
The difference in our area, speaking as the election agent in that by-election, is that there is only one single socialist group in the area, not only in the by-election. The SSP dont exist anywhere near this area so Solidarity are the only option and the only ones campaigning.
The ballochmyle by-election result is therefore better used as evidence for a single socialist party in the long-term, not as evidence of having just one group represent all in a by-election.
The reason that both parties failed in Glenrothes is that neither have a base for campaigning in that contituency, our result came from having a strong party involved locally.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 3:05 pm
Jim,
If there is a conviction for perjury, of course the original verdict will be set aside. It will have been a verdict reached after hearing false testimony. Your nitpicking won’t change that.
I’m not SSP, by the way. I’m Green.
Marie
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 3:20 pm
you are wrong marie, it is possible to secure a conviction on perjury without it being evidence that was crucial to the jury’s decision.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 3:29 pm
Actually, that’s just rubbish, Jim. Absolute rubbish. Simply, a conviction would make it clear that the initial action was based on a lie. You can’t possibly believe what you’re spinning, unless you’re a bit simple.
I sense a new Solidarity strategy of disinformation has been agreed.
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 3:36 pm
Marie,
It is possible that two people could both be found guilty of perjury who gave evidence on different sides of the orginal case. Where would that leave your theory?
A conviction MIGHT make the orginal case set aide, but it is impossible for you to say for certain wthout knowing what thedetails of the indictment are.
What agreed strategy? I am taking part in a debate in a website forum? Do you really need to turn that debate into some propaganda attack on a cartoon-character vesrion of me as an evil spin doctor? Or suggest some Solidarity media conspiracy.
Any point given in eveidence could be the subject of a perjury trial but not every point is decisive on wethere or not Tommy was defamed?
You have been fed an optimistic and simplistic version, based on wishful thinking, for some reason.
It is the conclusion that you have reached based on what you know. Based on your knowledge, what would happen if one person was convicted of perjury that gave evidence in Tommys favour, let’s say Gail, and one person was convicted of perjury re eveidence given against Tommy, what parts of the original case would be set aside?
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 24 February, 2009 @ 3:53 pm
Jim,
The entire thing would be set aside and Tommy would be welcome to try to sue again.
As for people on each side being convicted, nobody on the other side has been charged.
My version is not oprimistic or simplistic, nor was I fed it.
I have some knowledge of the law, however, as a former solicitor.
Marie
Comment by Marie — 24 February, 2009 @ 4:10 pm
The Lothian Police have spent nearly £2 million on this case. Compare this to the £3.7 million that Glasgow City Council want to ’save’ by closing 25 schools. Where are their priorites?
Isn’t this a total waste of money, spent in order to protect the reputation (sic) of the News of The World? Its so obviously a political case. Where is the police investigation into Tony Blairs lies that led to the invasion of Iraq? That is much more mportant issue with dramatically more important consequences than this alleged crime. http://tinyurl.com/ahb868
Comment by DuncanB — 24 February, 2009 @ 4:13 pm
Duncan is quite right.
this case is clearly a poltical witch-hunt. whether sherisan is convicted or walks free the left has to engage with him and more importantly it has to give answers to a working class that is angry and hurting from the economic whirlwind that blows around them.
I agree with jim m, a coalition of the existing left parties is not enough.there is potentially a huge audience for out there for our answers.But what answers do we give them ?…
Comment by graham — 25 February, 2009 @ 12:48 am
#42 Marie, “As for people on each side being convicted, nobody on the other side has been charged.”
Yes but I was putting forward a hypothetical point as you know. Without knowing the details of the indictment or what the charges are, your ’set aside’ argument is somehting that is likely but, as a former lawyer, you should know is not a foregone conclusion.
The investigation is still going on, the Police stated last week that they ended their investigation of the Sheridans in March 2008 so we cant rule out other people being charged.
Comment by Jim Monaghan — 25 February, 2009 @ 9:06 am
#2
As I understand it, there is an upcoming council by election in Dundee where the SSP are the only left party standing.
Comment by Jim Carroll — 21 February, 2009 @ 11:22 am
well that was worthwhile comrades. 1 “left” candidate gets 52 votes (1.5%) - so much for the argument that having one candidate would make a difference on the electoral field !
Standing candidates with no track record in an area or workplace means you get treated with the disdain you deserve. Still it must’ve made all that hard work and financial sacrifice worth it. I wonder what the money spent to votes received ratio was, at least £10 for every vote I would have a guesstimate at.
10% of the ssp vote came from SWP members that live in the ward !
Comment by Mary Brooksbank — 13 March, 2009 @ 8:16 pm
The Internet’s Fastest, Easiest And Laziest ‘Plug-And-Play’ Software For Making Immediate Money Online With [b]Twitter[/b]…
[b]The Killer Software That Makes Me $3267.75 EveryDay Uding Twitter[/b]
Using The Power Of Twitter.Com And This Plug-And-Play Software You Have An Automated Money Machine That Can’t Stop Sending You Cash…Even If You Want It To!
FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!! FREE!!!!
[b][url=http://turbocashgeneratorfree.wordpress.com]!!! DOWNLOAD HERE !!![/url][/b]
Comment by Whissetep — 15 January, 2010 @ 9:28 pm