Some initial observations on TUSC in the local elections

The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC) stood 174 candidates in the local elections in England on 5 May 2011.

It’s always important to have a sense of proportion. When dealing with election results, it’s vital. It’s easy to exaggerate election results; to put a favourable gloss on them in order to bolster the morale of your supporters. Elections are brutal. You can’t argue with the results. But how we interpret them must include looking at them in context.

Overall the results are a good initial foray into the local elections. Given the difficulties that the socialist left has had working together to present candidates in elections over the last decade, it was a success to be able to put forward 174 candidates, representing the Socialist Party, the Socialist Workers’ Party and independent socialists and trade unionists, with the significant backing of RMT general secretary Bob Crow and other senior figures in that union. In addition the Walsall Democratic Labour Party stood under its own name but endorsed the TUSC programme.

TUSC was standing on an explicit ‘No Cuts’ platform. Whilst there is massive opposition to the cuts, as shown by the massive TUC demonstration on 26 March, there is still a large section of the population that believes that some cuts are necessary. That argument still has to be defeated.

Labour has undoubtedly benefited from the anti-Con-Dem coalition mood. The Lib-Dems were trounced because of the way they betrayed those who voted for them in last year’s general election. Those opposed to the cuts will have voted overwhelmingly for Labour, even though Labour is implementing the cuts at a local level. In most places, it has to be remembered, there were no ‘No Cuts’ candidates to vote for, even for the minority of people who, at this stage, would be prepared to cast their votes for a new, unknown party putting forward that position. In the face of the Con-Dem attacks on public services and the welfare state Labour is seen as a line of defence; as being better than the Tories.

At the moment, most voters think Labour is opposed to the cuts. Many do not realise that Labour in government would implement similar cuts, albeit more slowly. My own experience campaigning in Peckham was that most traditional Labour voters did not know that the Labour-run Southwark council had implemented £33 million cuts with a further £18 million cuts to follow next year. Others thought that there was no alternative to the cuts and that Labour would protect services better than the Tories. There was a section who weren’t going to vote for any party as ‘they’re all the same’. There was another group who were interested in what we had to say and we persuaded some of those to vote for us.

Over the next year, as the cuts begin to bite, the harsh reality of Labour cuts at local level will lead many Labour voters to question their loyalties. Whether they stop voting Labour and whether they cast their votes for socialists depends to a large degree upon what socialists do. The process of Labour voters breaking with Labour will be a slow and uneven process and socialists can only win the votes of those who do decide to break with Labour if they present an alternative for them to support.

In the limited number of wards where TUSC did present an alternative to the cuts programme supported by Labour, Lib Dems and Tories, the results were encouraging.

13 candidates polled over 10%, with three receiving over 30% and a fourth getting 28%. A further 31 candidates polled between 5% – 10%; 56 polled between 2.5% – 5%; 44 polled less than 2% but of those, only 5 got less than 1%.

We are commenting here on generally small votes and low percentages. That is to be expected for a party that has no real national or local profile. In most, if not all, areas where TUSC stood, the voters will not have heard of TUSC until the last few weeks before polling day. And most voters will have received only one or two leaflets. We do not have the forces, at this stage to do much more than this. In this context, some of the votes are quite good.

Clearly we need to address the issues of profile and publicity and find ways of raising our profile and inserting ourselves into the public eye.

Where TUSC candidates stood against a background of previous work, where there was a knowledge and recognition of what the candidate represented, some very good results were obtained.

It was extremely disappointing to lose sitting councillors Michael Lavallette in Preston, Ray Holmes in Bolsover and Pete Smith of the Walsall DLP but their votes were very good, winning 39.8%, 28.2% and 34% respectively. Rob Windsor, a former Socialist Party councillor in Coventry, polled 30.3% in his attempt to win back the seat he lost last year. Former councillors George Tapp in Salford and Jackie Grunsell in Kirklees won 16.1% and 14.8% respectively.

Elsewhere, Maxine Bowler polled 14% in Sheffield and Tom Woodcock polled 12% in Cambridge. Both have stood for election before and have built support in the local electorate. Other notable TUSC results include winning 7% of the vote in four wards in Carlisle and in two in Gateshead.

In Rugby TUSC stood in seven wards and polled an average of 7%, with high points of 16.2% and 12.1%. Candidates included the regional chair of the FBU and the secretary of Warwickshire Unite. They raised £2,000 in donations, including a personal donation of £500 from FBU general secretary Matt Wrack. There is now a local TUSC branch with links to local trade unions.

Where there has been consistent work, the results are better. The lesson is obvious. If socialists want to get better election results we need to stand regularly and campaign consistently in between elections. But even the lower votes polled by TUSC candidates confirm that there is a constituency for a working-class party putting forward socialist policies.

One point is obvious but is worth making. You can only get votes for your programme and party if you stand candidates. Otherwise, the people who might have voted for you will either vote for another party or won’t vote at all. A large number of people do not vote – 35% at the last general election. Many don’t think there’s anyone worth voting for.

If TUSC had been in a position to stand candidates in every ward in England its vote may have been small in percentage terms at this stage but the aggregate vote would have been significant. I do not have figures for the number of voters in these recent local elections but in last year’s general election just over 25 million people voted in English constituencies (65.5% turnout). An average vote of two percent would mean half a million votes. That’s not a bad place for a small socialist party to aim for. But it means developing the profile, resources and supporters to be able to stand candidates on a much wider basis than we were able to do on this occasion.

This will take a lot of patient hard work and determination but it is an achievable target. How quickly we get there depends on many factors, not least what happens in terms of class struggle over the next few years and how TUSC responds.

When we stand in elections, we prefer to win. Having elected representatives like Michael Lavallette and Dave Nellist is a great advantage to the socialist cause. Nobody like losing. But standing without winning is an inevitable but necessary part of the process of building support for socialist ideas. The more regularly we stand and the more widely we stand the greater the accumulated support will be. We have to stand to get votes.

In the context of the number of local elections contested on 5 May, 174 candidates is a very small number. But it is a start. The TUSC initiative has the

Shame on Wisconsin removing trade union rights

This news story i have just read really upset me. I care alot about unions as some of you who do read this will know, i'm part of a union myself and this move here just looks likea nother heavy fisted attempt by the capitalist system to remove workers rights. Really sad this is and i think it shows how far the capitalists will go to get their cuts package through even in teh United States struggles are continuing.
I think this will only encourage protesters to come back harder with more resolve though so all may not be lost here.


The Wisconsin state assembly has voted to approve a plan to strip public-sector unions of most of their collective bargaining rights.

Senate Republicans used a procedural move to pass the bill on Wednesday.

Republican Governor Scott Walker promised to sign the bill into law as quickly as possible.

AFL-CIO union leader Richard Trumka earlier attacked the Republicans' move as a "corruption of democracy". The plan has prompted widespread protest.

Police have been ejecting demonstrators from the state capitol building after weeks of mass demonstrations in support of public workers.

Mr Walker and Republicans say the bill is necessary to help the state balance its budget deficit.

"This is about protecting the middle class and doing it in a way that avoids massive tax increases and massive lay-offs," Mr Walker said on Thursday.

He added that the bill would give local governments the "tools" they needed to balance their own budgets.

Protesters flood capitol

The US state's 14 Democratic senators had sought to prevent the bill moving forward by fleeing the state, leaving the chamber short of the number needed for a vote.

But Republicans used a procedural move to allow them to vote on the measure in committee instead on Wednesday evening.

Crowds of protesters swamped the state capitol in Madison following the vote.

The state House - the lower legislative chamber - passed the measure in a 53-43 vote on Thursday afternoon, after police had removed protesters from the building.

The state faces a $3.6bn (£2.23bn) budget deficit in the coming two-year period. The bill on labour unions would affect rubbish collectors, teachers, nurses, prison guards and other public workers.

Democrats, labour unions and their supporters, who disparage the bill as an attack on labour unions and on the middle class, spent three weeks protesting at the state capitol building.

On Thursday, Mr Trumka, head of one of the largest labour union coalitions in the US, told reporters the Republican move had engendered solidarity among union supporters.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Washington, Mr Trumka joked that unions should give Mr Walker their "Mobiliser of the Year" award for galvanizing support for labour among thousands of protesters and in national polls.

the liberal democrats in the coalition

Hello and welcome to another blog post. This post may sound like a bit of a attak on the liberals and i'm sorry if you ar a supporter of such, i'd love to take you up on a debate about your principles and the future of your party.

From waht seems to me a lot of liberal voters and supporters are blinded by power and the chance to get their beloved party into government.

The main question i want to ask you from this post is, is it all worth it ?

I really do believe despite waht the liberals say they have well and truely sold themselves out to the conservatives.
I recieved a responce to my email to Simon Hughes MP earlier and he was saying why he thinks this budget is liberal and fair. well i'm sorry simon i think you are sorely mistaken, is a rise in VAT a good thing for all, is it fair to all ? no it isnt it is a regressive tax which hits the poorer in our society the hardest.They can blame labour all they want but at the end of the day these are just excuses shooting over your shoulder at the last government to make the public feel its right what you are doing. In reality the polls suggest the liberals have taken a right battering. In some polls it shows them with just 13 points and labour just 2 points behind the tories.

As labour are the only party truely national with seats and major representation in all parts of the United Kingdom i think they are right to stand by their principles and be the true party for fairness.

Yes we made a few mistakes here and there but the recession was caused by the banks and them lending too much which people couldnt pay back. There was a credit crunch and they had no idea how to get out of it so ended up coming to the government to ask for help.

Like any good government they tried to help as much as they can to avoid a complete collapse of the banking sector. So in affect the bankers are the luckiest proportion of people i stil think. Even today they are still giving eachother ridiculous bonus's even though it is frowned on now.

Vince cables idea of the carrot and the stick approach of threatening the banks to start lending again is just complete foolishness in my view. The banks have no confidence and feel that they are treading on egg shells all the time with customers. Untill they can see the econemy starting to grow again and people starting to spend its no use Vice having a pop at them over not spending when they are being heavily scrutinised.

In my view it was the banks that got us into this situation in the first place so should be the ones who should foot the majority of the bill for getting us out of this mess. It was not labours fault or Gordon browns fault at all as leading tories would have yuo believe. they only tried to remedy the problem. This is a global crisis started in America and swept around the globe, You simply cant pin all of this mess on labour and Gordon brown i'm sorry i rather think Gordon did a excellent job despite what people say, we could have been in a far worse position if he hadnt done waht he had done. Even today he still regrets not spotting the signs sooner but who in say 2005 could have seen this coming ? i know i certainly couldnt.

So please dont believe the tories old mantra that we are just as bad as greece and all this scare mongering tactics, which in my view is a very dirty ugly form of politics, to scare your electorat into voting you in to get these barbaric cuts through. If the lib dems have any form of principles left inside their weak wet souls i suggest they try harder and work closer with labour on certain things, i know this may upset the coalition apple cart slightly but would they rather stand up for true fairness and progressive futures in this country or hang on to their limo's and fancy job titles in the government where in my view they shouldnt even be with just 52 seats it still doesnt seem right to me.