Ged has asked for a copy of the open letter that he sent to the NEC (21 May 2007) to be placed on the website. Which we have done in full and added an editorial comment.

Ged Dempsey, Gazette
Amicus NEC, Personal Capacity

Open Letter to NEC

Chair/ NEC Colleagues,

It is with regret that John Mc Donnell has been denied by the Parliamentary Labour Party to be a contender and for their to be a "shoe-in" and anointment of the next leader without a contest.

I believe having no contest has cheated members of the party and trade unions of having the desperately needed debate over policy and direction and to denied the chance of creating a fresh beginning. It could have helped towards re-invigorating the party.

I don't detect any change over public /civil services, employment rights and the widening gap between rich and poor and the many other crucial issues our members and families face.

I believe Amicus and some unions have failed to grasp the nettle by getting behind
John Mac and comradely persuasion /cajoling of our trade union MPs over the last 12 months.

It'll be our members and families who will be stung and pay the price !

Its not a matter of winning or losing but defending what is right -
socially, politically and ethically.

I believe that Amicus and also Unite, should decline to nominate Brown as his policies are contrary to our members and many union policies of Amicus and fellow trade unions. To do so would also soil our integrity in the way the matter has been orchestrated by the party heirarcy and PLP.

Listening to the wireless over the last few days and workplaces, there is a lot of anger and concern from activists over how its been handled and they've been sidelined again.

It is indefencible for the PLP to stop the membership from having a vote.

The members and trade unionists have been ignored and bypassed by a small part of the party - the PLP.

The membership have been denied a contest and a genuine debate over policy and direction.

The electoral college was not put into place because MPs, no doubt, conceded to the machine, pressure or vested interests. Even the blairites who have done their best for the last 10 years to berate the chancellor, supported him to stop any debate over policy and direction.

We'll never know how they would have done in the hustings and a vote, but I'm sure many rank and file members would have welcomed real labour values and convictions being promoted again by John Mc Donnell. A fresh alternative to new Labour.

Its a bad day for democracy more akin to a former south american tin pot regime.

As for the deputy leadership, its a non job - made up of candidates who all supported the illegal war in iraq, foundation hospitals, ID cards, attacks on civil liberties, privatisation of our public / civil services and other discredited policies.
A bit like Like comparing tins of peas !

Out of the 6, I would reluctantly, with an heavy heart, prefer Cruddos or Benn.

Enjoy the meeting.

Regards

Ged Dempsey, NEC

Editor’s comments

We are all extremely disappointed that John didn’t make it on to the ballot paper. The temptation in these frustrating circumstances is to turn inward and start infighting within the Labour Party which doesn’t help the Party but instead feeds our political opponents.

Whilst we would not expect the PLP (given its nature) to be leading the revolution there are serious concerns about how the 300 Unite supported MPs have voted. It is a sobering thought that given the Gazette support for McDonnell and the Official Blessings of Cruddas that they each have only received a slack handful of votes from those MP’s.

The majority of MP’s of all parties are populist animals by nature. Each time the Labour Party has moved to the left it has been as a result of the Party following public opinion that first formed as an outcome of campaigns led predominantly by the trade union movement.

This is the reality we must recognise and instead of slipping into defeatism we should use that reality to change the direction of the PLP.

Our response to the current situation must be to thrust the McDonnell campaign as a spear into the ground from which we start to re-build a campaigning mass movement around the trade unions, with the objective of changing opinion both inside and outside of Westminster.

Regarding the Deputy Leadership, my initial thoughts were that I could find little to cheer about amongst the records of the six contestants, “tins of peas” indeed. However, looking for a strategic position Cruddas does offer two tactical advantages. The first is that he has said that he does not want a cabinet position; instead he wants to be the link between the Party and the Government (an onerous and pithy task). In this position he would not be held by the cabinet consensus, and ultimately he would be judged by the membership and stand or fall on his personal record alone. Secondly both sections of the Unite leadership have invested a considerable amount of support into Cruddas; it would have been foolish to do this (working on the free lunch principal) without a high expectation that it could in turn be beneficial for working people if he was elected.

It could be that the leadership recognised these tactical advantages a long while before I did!