Affiliated Political Fund
REPORT 2002
Early in 2002 I was a member of UNISON's delegation to the
Scottish Labour Party conference which voted against some of
the main policy documents.
We did this because the policy process had not allowed us to
debate and vote on the use of PP/PFI in public services. The
issue had been raised over and over again by UNISON in policy
forum meetings by branch member Natalie Robertson amongst others.
However it had always been deferred and in the end we were told
that it was a Westminster issue.
Later in the year this branch successfully moved a motion at
the APF's Scottish Forum that UNISON should reconsider its support
for Partnership in Power, the package of policy-making procedures
which led to the Labour Party's Policy Forum processes. We feel
that this has obscured accountability and led to the kind of
result described above.
These two events mark a sea change in the approach of UNISON's
Labour Link. A more combative attitude on policy issues on which
we disagree with the government is evident. For example UNISON
and other unions won the vote at the national Labour Party conference
on a fundamental and independent review of PPP/PFI, against
the government position.
They also sum up our view on the political funds review which
is ongoing. The question posed is how should UNISON's political
objectives be achieved. Our answer is both through influencing
the policies of the party we are affiliated to (and which is
in government) through levy paid by APF members; and by general
campaigning on specific issues through the GPF. To do this,
however, we have to be a lot more effective at fighting for
UNISON policies in the Labour Party; and to do that the APF
itself has to improve its openness and accountability.
Another area in which there is a notable gap between the policies
of the union and the government is international affairs, in
particular Iraq and nuclear disarmament. We made a submission
to the Labour Party consultation on Britain in the World which
dealt with these issues and with GATS; and the Scottish APF
agreed our motion on the same lines.
2003 is a year of elections. We are sure that a vote for Labour
is a vote for a party which makes public services a top priority.
The substantial growth in funding shows that. It is also important
that the Labour manifestos for the Council and Scottish Parliament
elections clearly express this and our branch has successfully
moved a resolution that the local manifesto should include a
commitment to locally controlled services provided directly
by the Council.
Other motions which we have taken to local constituency parties
this year were on the post office and the fire fighters.
Lastly I would like to record my thanks to Natalie Robertson,
chair of the APF Committee, who has resigned from the branch
on moving from Edinburgh this year.
MATTHEW CRIGHTON
APF Officer
top
|
