Mick Gilgunn opened the meeting by explaining the recent history of the revival of the Trades Council, with assistance from the GLATUC. The Trades Council really got going properly with the escalating campaign against the public service cuts however, becoming part of the campaign to Defend the Whittington A+E department. The Trades Council then linked up with the DWC and the Right to Work Campaign to form Islington Hands Off Our Public Services (IHOOPS).
IHOOPS maintains a politically balanced steering group with representatives from across the coalition and Mick stressed that he considered this essential to encourage the broadest possible participation. Successful campaigning would depend on reaching out into the community, into non-unionised, non-active sections of the working class and mobilizing them, meaning that political balance was critical.
Mick explained that IHOOPS now undertook regular stalls and petitioning activities and more than 7 people every week contacting them to get more involved.
Mick stressed that he saw the cuts as an extension of the Thatcherite project and related the story of his own politicization during this period.
There was then a general discussion about the key features of cuts campaigning. Key points included:
1. The narrow economic basis of the drive towards public service cuts, with Osborne’s budget basically doing the work of a narrow section of British society centred on finance capital in the City of London and monopoly capital, particularly those trading in services.
2. The importance of seeing the CSR as part of a broad legislative programme by the Coalition to open up services, inaugurating a new round of privatisation and financialisation of social life, in spite of the fact that it was the architecture of this financialisation that had failed so spectacularly in 2008.
3. The consequent importance of orienting cuts campaigns toward long-term movement building, rather than one-off, short-term campaigning objectives. It was also stressed that there was a political danger to these campaigns in ultra-left groups seeking to target the campaigns mainly against Labour councils as part of short-term electoral or party-building projects.
4. Several strategic objectives for cuts campaigns were identified, including,
i) maximum possible protection of working people in council budgets/rent policies in the short term.
ii) building a working-class led movement over a four/five year period
iii) challenging the ‘common sense’ that there is no alternative to the cuts
5. It was noted that the pursuit of objective i) could involve a range of tactics including pressuring Councillors to shelter working class people as far as possible (although it was noted that in the event of illegal budgets or resignations, council executives would assume control and implement budgets regardless) making public statements to repudiate the cuts and concentrating fire on the role of national governments.
6. It was suggested that cuts campaigns might seek meetings with councillors to discuss likely future developments at local level in order to coordinate where possible and assess tactics in each case.
7. It was stressed that propaganda must contain common sense appeals to alternatives, from the role of progressive taxation in tacking the deficit to the need for an alternative economic agenda.
8. It was agreed that there was a role of cuts campaigns in coordinating social housing tenants responses to the attacks in the CSR.
9. Finally, it was agreed to invite comrades from Hackney and Tower Hamlets branch to the nex branch meeting and social to discuss local cuts campaigning in the region.
