Deadpan sarcasm of the day
Emphasis, as always, is ours.
“STATEMENT BY SCOTTISH COOPERATIVE PARTY EXECUTIVE
The Scottish Co-operative Party’s 2011 manifesto is one full of co-operative and mutual solutions to the challenges faced in Scotland, issues of independence, devolution or the constitutional settlement did not feature. The annual Co-operative Party conference has passed motions which promote a view of Scotland playing a vital role in a United Kingdom.
We have noted the personal comments made by Mary Lockhart, a long serving Co-operative Party and Labour Party member. Mary has been a great advocate for co-operative and mutual solutions. Whilst we recognise that members of political parties hold differing, sometimes opposite, positions the views Mary has expressed are not shared by the Party. Mary has offered her resignation from the role of Chair of the Scottish Co-operative Party and the Scottish Executive committee has accepted this.“
Mary has issued the following statement:
“The Executive of the Scottish Co-operative Party has accepted my resignation from the role of Chair. I offered my resignation because I accept that no Chairperson should use that role to promote personal opinions that conflict with the policy of that organisation, or may imply a position that the organisation does not hold. I am grateful to my colleagues and comrades for the measured way in which they have handled this matter. I remain a committed Co-operator, and an active member of both the Co-operative Party and the Labour Party, and am glad that both parties are mature enough and broad enough to accommodate a diversity of opinion in their members.””
Hats off to you, Mary. We don’t think they’ve even noticed.
Just for the record: Mary Lockhart’s article for Scotland on Sunday did NOT mention the Co-operative Party at any point, except at the very bottom where someone (possibly the newspaper) had added the disclaimer “Mary Lockhart is chair of the Scottish Co-operative Party, but writes here in a personal capacity”.
I think it well worth emphasising that Mary Lockhart was pushed out over an issue which DOES NOT feature in party policy/manifesto, with no published party line to contradict.
Excellent point, Doug. Manifesto here:
link to party.coop
I can find no reference to constitutional issues at all.
I wonder if Mary has had a visit from the “Truth Team”?
Extraordinary; A Socialist Party would rather stick with the UK to be ruled by an uberTory machine, demolishing everything that they would consider worthwhile and important, than a Social Democratic Party which encompasses their values.
Ed Milliband hasn’t promised to reverse what has been happening. In fact he is set to continue what the Tories are doing.
It would be good to hear what the vital role is that the Cooperative Party see Scotland playing. Is it one goes down, everybody goes down? How do they rationalise their approach?
Fifty years of almost all Tory Governments. Perhaps they could look at what Einstein said about repeating exactly the same action and expecting a different outcome.
I think this is just plain sad and has all the hallmarks of the “party machine” in action. You can only be chair if you are a Unionist then?
It is hard to be a Labour supporter in Scotland these days.
“You can only be chair if you are a Unionist then?”
To me, as someone who hadn’t heard of this outfit until that article by Mary Lockhart last week, it says a whole lot more than that. It says don’t even think about becoming a member unless you’re a deeply closed-minded unionist. Same message Labour have been offering for the past few years too.
I find that very sad as their manifesto looks OK, and I could have been persuaded by it. Now it just looks like political posturing to muddy the waters somehow.
I wonder if there are hundreds or better still thousands more Mary’s out there who are keeping their heads down and their mouths shut until they get to the ballot box having seen what has happened to her.
Well I find the decision to be quite disgraceful. I am sure that Ms Lockhart was put under pressure by someone. Is it the view of the Co-operative Party that NO ONE can hold a personal view that differs from those of the “Committee” and maintain membership, even though their manifesto has no position on it? Is it now the case that the Co-operative Party are “Better Together” supporters? Is it now the case that pro-Independence members should also resign/leave the Party? I would like them to provide some clarity on their position.
There are a number of labour MPs who come under labour and co-operative I wonder how they pick the favoured few so yes they are a unionist movement
@Aplinal
She’s still a member of the party, she resigned her post as Chair.
A few facts about the Scottish Co-operative Party.
There is no Scottish Co-operative Party in the same way there is no Scottish Labour Party, Scottish Conservative Party and Scottish Lib-Dem party.
The “The Scottish Co-operative Party” is simply a registered party description for the Co-operative Party, 77 Weston Street, London, SE1 3SD
Party Leader: Mr Gareth Richard Thomas MP
Nominating officer: Ms Karen Lynn Wilkie
Treasurer: Ms Karen Lynn Wilkie
Members are also permitted to be members of the Labour party. The Co-operative party affiliates to the nearest Labour Party, region by region.
It has several MP’s and MSP’s in Westminster and Holyrood but only as joint candidates with Labour. It does not put forward candidates under its own banner for these elections.
Though it is a separate party according to the Electoral Commission the reality is that the Co-operative party can be regarded as just a pressure group within Labour.
In response to my request last night for anyone with information about BBC black-listing, I received the following this morning:
‘Hello Ian, I worked as a journalist at BBC Scotland for eight years,late 70s – mid 80s,and discovered my personnel file with the dreaded “Christmas Tree” sticker on it – although I didn’t know the significance of the innocuous looking green jagged symbol at that time. (The best newspaper coverage of the subject,which you’ve probably read by now,was in The Telegraph strangely enough.) How much that affected my career at the BBC I’ll never know though I left in frustration at the lack of advancement. I put the stigma down to the fact I joined the SNP while at University,though former colleagues who had the”Xmas tree” could only identify things as inconsequential as being born outside the UK. Please let me know if I can help further and I’d appreciate confidentiality in the meantime. Vote YES…(name withheld).’
Pretty much speaks for itself. Anyone currently working for the BBC might want to consider each and every affiliation they’ve had in their lives: if you’ve been active in a Union; had ‘interesting’ friends; studied contentious subjects or expressed anything resembling an unorthodox opinion on anything, there’s a good chance your card is marked.
And once it’s marked? It stays marked.
Again, I ask for anyone with information about this to get in touch –
ian@stevenston4.fsnet.co.uk
As I said in replying to the person who sent the message, we may be nearing the point where the BBC’s hegemony in the cultural life of our society is reaching a natural end, but powerful vested interests will fight tooth and nail to keep it going, no matter how much Pacific Quay comes to resemble a garrison.
Mary,
You will do as London dictates.
You will not have views unless given to you by London.
You will, first and foremost, look out for the best interests of London.
London comes first.
In order to preserve the position of London the following is acceptable;
Child poverty levels to remain artificially high in Scotland.
Levels of dependency on the state (i.e. London) to remain artificially high in Scotland.
Levels of expenses for those within the party who adhere to the above and get a plum role in London (Westminster) to remain artificially high.
Levels of lies told about Scotland by those representing the party in London to remain artificially high.
Finally, Mary, your career, or lack of it, is now very acceptable, in order to preserve the enhanced, preeminent position of London.
Much as I’m reluctant to feel sympathy for SLAB MSPs and MPs, this perhaps indicates what a huge step it would be for any of them to publicly display an open-minded attitude to independence let alone come out as a Yes supporter. Their career would effectively be over, and no doubt some version of the forces of hell would be unleashed upon them. It would take a fair bit of guts and principle, and I don’t get the impression that there’s a excess of either on Westminster or Holyrood opposition benches.
Their career would effectively be over,
For a couple of years, perhaps.
Maybe this is a stupid question.
Is it official Labour policy that they are a Unionist party, or have the leadership just decided that it is? Has the membership ever been consulted?
Juteman
I can’t answer your query I’m afraid but, I did cancel labour party contributions collected via my union subs.
@ Jiggsbro
‘For a couple of years, perhaps.’
I foresee a scenario on 19/09/14 where all the SLAB timeservers and greasy pole climbers do a collective reverse ferret on independence and repackage themselves as The Labour Party of an Independent Scotland. They’ll still view the ‘premature anti-unionists’ as persona non grata though.
If she broke no formal rules, and her resignation was not entirely voluntary, ie she was made aware it was the only thing she could do simply because her views were incompatible with the job, then despite resigning, she may have grounds for constructive dismissal.
@DMW42.
I cancelled the political levy a while ago, and told the very nice lady that i was doing so for the Tory politics of new/old/whatever Labour. She was also told that my union sub would be cancelled if it ever came out pro-Union. I was told that my views would be passed on up the chain.
For some strange twisted logic, i had always paid the levy, even though i voted SNP. I hope to vote Labour in an independent Scotland. Hopefully the SSP will amalgamate with a new Scottish Labour party.
I just wonder if they seriously think people aren’t going to join the dots here. After all, everyone knows these sort of “resignations” are nothing of the sort.
So, after spending months denying the existence of pro-indy Labourites, despite the formation of Labour For Independence, we now have them being forced to acknowledge the existence of such people. Their answer? Make them persona non grata.
What are the chances of a Labour MSP announcing they are pro-indy now? Shame, any that did so would be lauded after a Yes vote and could have spearheaded the revival of their party. Can’t see it happening now.
I’ve heard rumours of there being several quite well known Tory politicians who are pro-indy, but obviously they refuse to say so publicly. Don’t know any names, unfortunately.
Woods Group boss has no fears over 2014 referendum
link to heraldscotland.com
IF neither party has discussed, let alone voted on, the subject of self-determination for Scotland, how is it possible to be out of step with their views?
I hope she takes them for constructive dismissal!
Isn’t Ian Davidson, chairchump of the Scottish Affairs Committee, sponsored by the Coop?
@velofello
yes, he is.
Other politicians sponsored by the Co-operative Party include Johann Lamont MSP
and George Foulkes when he was an MP.
link to en.wikipedia.org
And that kind of thing is why I try to avoid shopping in the COOP and using their bank even though their bank has interesting policies.
As a co-op employee and fervent supporter of the co-operative movement I find this disturbing. It stinks to high heaven of Labour interference.
I support independence 100%. Perhaps I’d better start looking for a new job!
Reads like the Soviet Union of old. Fits nicely with our Pravdaesque media though.
I foresee a scenario on 19/09/14 where all the SLAB timeservers and greasy pole climbers do a collective reverse ferret on independence and repackage themselves as The Labour Party of an Independent Scotland. They’ll still view the ‘premature anti-unionists’ as persona non grata though.
It would be difficult for them to do that if there was already an Independent Scottish Labour party set up by the premature anti-unionists, though. They’d have to campaign as the Labour party that didn’t believe in Scotland, against the one that did.
“Much as I’m reluctant to feel sympathy for SLAB MSPs and MPs, this perhaps indicates what a huge step it would be for any of them to publicly display an open-minded attitude to independence let alone come out as a Yes supporter.”
But that kind of oppression can only happen if people remain complicit in it. If one person comes out and this happens, and everyone else sticks their head back down, then such repression continues and people are unjustly treated. If those who feel the same have any kind of backbone, they should come out in solidarity, as should those who may disagree but have democratic principles.
I will have absolutely zero truck with any Labour MSP who keeps their head down and pretends to be unionist then says post independence they voted yes and were for it all along. Equally, I will have very little with any who turns pre-referendum but once the writing is on the wall. Now is the time to stand up and be counted, and lead. If they can’t or don’t, they’re worthless as politicians.
@rabb
I may be wrong, but although they are both part of the general co-operative movement, I don’t think there is any direct connection between “The Co-op” and the Co-operative Party these days, if there ever was.
I quite liked their square sliced inside a roll and butter.
First Baxters now the Co-op …………….where will it all end?
Ochone! Ochone!
I look on it as a sign that SLab is terrified by it’s own private poll results.
Good!
Albert
They appear to be the political wing of the Co-op and thus still have ties.
Albert Herring says:
27 April, 2013 at 8:37 pm
@rabb
I may be wrong, but although they are both part of the general co-operative movement, I don’t think there is any direct connection between “The Co-op” and the Co-operative Party these days, if there ever was.
Albert, the co-operative party is funded to tune of £800,000 per annum from group. A fair amount of this trickles over to Labour too.
In my eyes that’s involvement.
From Wikipedia:
link to en.wikipedia.org
Funding and finance
Most of the party’s income comes from grants made by the retail co-operative societies and from members’ fees. Local retail societies provide most funding for local party councils, which form the basis of members contact with the party. The party recognises several structures which exist without society support (voluntary parties) as being part of the whole. Subscriptions from members also support the party financially.
@Jiggsbro
‘It would be difficult for them to do that if there was already an Independent Scottish Labour party set up by the premature anti-unionists, though. They’d have to campaign as the Labour party that didn’t believe in Scotland, against the one that did.’
Maybe, but they’re polling 30-40% on a similar disconnect currently. A bit of bs about a vision of a diffferent Scotland, social justice, the party yer granny voted for blah, blah, and the some of the people who are fooled all the time stick with it.
Dear Mary Lockhart,
Welcome to the “YES” family for Scottish independence, we are a very broad kirk indeed with many different ideas, philosophy’s and sense’s of humour. But we have one overwhelming ideal in that no matter what our differences are we are all united in the belief that Scotland’s independence is the right way forward for our country, its people and scottish society overall.
It was a pleasure to read your article last Sunday in the Scotland on Sunday it showed bravery and honesty and I’am sure has helped people to look with a much more positive light at the reasons for Scottish independence.
So yet again welcome.
Albert Herring:
In 2012 the co-operative movement donated £1,041,341.00 to the Co-operative Party
In 2012 the co-operative movement donated £65,000 directly to the Labour Party.
In 2012 the Co-operative Party donated £92,154.77 to the Labour Party.
As a Co-perative member whose father used to drive one of their vans for many years ago I am well aware that the whole ethos has changed as they now buy up numerous chemist shops on a purely commercial basis.
My partner was made redundant when they centralised all their Scot Mid wine buying to Manchester and I am really disappointed, but not surprised, that they are so beholden to the Labour Party that a principled Chair person feels pressurised to resign, Not that any Labour place person would have such principles to resign.
Can I just say that The Co-operative Group have NOT declared a position on independence (that I am aware of).
My personal opinion is that they will take a genuinely neutral stance. They have nothing to gain or lose either way. They are in the business of serving communities and not politicians.
Having said the above, it is still disturbing that the Labour party commands such influence on the political arm of the movement.
Tomorrow’s Sunday Herald front page:
link to twitpic.com
Glasgow can do miles better to quote a previous slogan.
@ Marcia 10.32
About time. I hope that this is not going to be a “theatre for the masses, passes for the leaders” stunt.
@rabb doug bike et al
I stand corrected.
Funny there seems to be nothing on either organisations’ website re these links.
I think there will be a lot of MP’s and MSP’s from all parties switching over to the indy camp over the next 12 months.
However, I’d be very wary of the ones changing over at the last minute (the troughers)
link to scotland.party.coop
“The annual Co-operative Party conference has passed motions which promote a view of Scotland playing a vital role in a United Kingdom.”.
Note the Lack of “Scottish Co_op” in the line above.
The annual Co-operative Party conference is UK wide for this UK political organisation. The web site states that the Scottish Manifesto has no policy or anything stated on the constitution. However as it is really an anglo UK based organisation this UK party only promote Scotland within the UK.
Tories, Labour, BBC, Co-op, CBI are all “in Scotland” none are ‘of’ or ‘for’ Scotland.
Does anyone believe she would have been given the space for an article had she not held the position she did?
Ergo it was not written in a personal capacity.
“Ergo it was not written in a personal capacity.”
It was, though. The clue was where it said “this is written in a personal capacity”.