A place to discuss Equality, Trade Unionism, Human Rights, Politics, Law, LGBT, Feminism and whatever else takes my fancy and yours.......
20 Dec 2008
23 Jul 2008
United Nations - LGBT Victory for Inclusion
Pople of Lesbos have been Lesbians for thousands of years!
The lawsuit was brought by three islanders from Lesbos, home of the ancient poet Sappho, who praised love between women. The island is a popular holiday destination for lesbians.
The suit said that the name of the LGBT group - Homosexual and Lesbian Community of Greece - “insults the identity” of the people of Lesbos.
In dismissing the case, the court said that islanders did not have sole claim to the name. Attorneys for the three islanders said they may appeal to the European Court.
Dimitris Lambrou one of the litigants in the case said Sappho was not gay. “But even if we assume she was, how can 250,000 people of Lesbian descent - including women - be considered homosexual?” Lambrou also denied the suit was homophobic. “The word lesbian has been associated with gay women for the past few decades but we have been Lesbians for thousands of years,” he said.
18 Jul 2008
Happy 90th Birthday Nelson Mandela
17 Jul 2008
Union Futures - Next Steps
Day 2 of the Strike - Blackpool
Views from Blackpool Picket Line
16 Jul 2008
Strike On!
Local Government All Out for Fair Pay
Registrars in glass houses......
And now it is reported that Ladele herself has had a child out of wedlock. I am sure that I read somewhere that orthodox Christian views are against sex outside marriage.
UNISON advises that no legal precedent has been established by the tribunal ruling. Other cases have had different outcomes. A Christian magistrate sought the right to opt out of family cases that could result in children being placed with same sex couples. He lost his claim. A local government worker who claimed religious discrimination when he was sacked for distributing homophobic leaflets of bible quotes in the workplace also lost his case
Thank God that Islington are appealing! Diane Abbott MP has tabled an Early Day Motion calling on the Government to clarify or amend the law, if the appeal fails. You can call on your MP to add their name to the Early Day Motion, number 2039.
13 Jul 2008
More on the Registrar
God is above Employment Law
This opens the gateway for refusal of services and conscience decisions being made for example, on the provision of abortion and I hope that Islington will appeal. I am stillreading the transcript of the tribunal decision and will be blogging more about this case, the more I read and when I hve looked at the other caselaw that the tribuunal relied on. It makees for depressing reading and no doubt UNISON's National LGBT Committee will be discussing this further at their meeting on the 19th July 2008.
Also see Craig's Blog - Beyond belief
Back to Blogging
- Ladele v Islington Employment Tribunal ruling
- LGBT Asylum
- Boris and Pride
- Ray Lewis
- Tatchell and Harman
- TUC LGBT Conference, UNISON Labour Link, Prides
- Reggae music
26 Jun 2008
Labour Funds and the Unions
Watch here.
2012: Will Sugar say You're Fired to Boris?
Equal before the law
24 Jun 2008
Heinz 57 Varieties Unless You're Gay
UNISON pledges "Key Role for Equality Reps"
The Cabinet Office press release today stated "Workplace equality reps can assist employees who are facing discrimination and provide support to people on a wide range of matters, such as flexible working for parents and those caring for older relatives, disability, age, equal pay, and harassment. They also negotiate with employers to help individuals get a fair deal at work or stop them falling out of the workplace, for example by supporting disabled people (or those who become disabled)."
UNISON Local Government Members Agree to Strike
22 Jun 2008
Paul Ince becomes first Black Manager of a Premier League Foortball Club
NW Media Coverage on EU directive
Serves You Right in Political Life
“Genuine equality will not be achieved by providing the same service for everyone; equality of opportunity is not enough. It means delivering the same outcome for everyone, recognising the diverse needs of different communities and individuals and responding appropriately to those needs.” (19 February 2008)
In 2008 there are no openly gay or lesbian people in the British cabinet, the Scottish cabinet or the Welsh cabinet. There are only two openly gay peers in the House of Lords out of more than 700 members and only one openly lesbian MP in the House of Commons and no Lesbian peers in the Lords. There are no out Trans politicians or anyone who is open about being bisexual.
The report states that despite modest efforts by some political parties, the majority of lesbian and gay people expect to experience discrimination if they seek selection by a political party to run for parliament. Nearly nine in ten lesbian and gay people think they would face barriers from the Conservative Party; six in ten think they would face barriers from the Labour Party and nearly half expect to face barriers if they sought selection from the Liberal Democrats. Women are more likely to think this: two thirds of lesbians expect to be discriminated against if they wanted to be selected by the Labour Party.
The report also claims that political parties have even failed to convince their own lesbian and gay supporters that they can play a full role in political life with significant numbers expecting to face discrimination should they seek selection as a parliamentary candidate. The Conservative Party is regarded least favourably out of the main parties with seven out often lesbian and gay party supporters expecting barriers to selection. Stonewall though claim that, nearly half of Labour supporters say they would also expect problems from their party getting selected along with three in ten Liberal Democrats.
Living Together, a YouGov survey of more than 2000 adults commissioned by Stonewall in October 2006, found that nearly nine in ten voters would be ‘comfortable’ if their MP was lesbian or gay, yet more than half felt that lesbian and gay people were likely to conceal their sexual orientation in politics.
Local politics is little better. Lesbian and gay people expect to face similar barriers if they want to be selected to run as local councillors. Nearly two thirds would expect to face barriers from the Labour Party, nearly nine in ten would expect to face barriers from the Conservative Party, and half would expect to encounter barriers from the Liberal Democrats.
The report also gives examples of homophobia endemic in politics citing the incident during the 2005 General Election campaign, when Sayeeda Warsi, the Conservative candidate for Dewsbury, published campaign materials saying that the equalisation of the age of consent had allowed “school children to be propositioned for homosexual relationships”. They also use the example of Miranda Grell, a Labour candidate for the Leyton Ward in the London Borough of Waltham Forest, who as we know was convicted under the Representation of the People Act (1989) on two counts of making false statements about another candidate to gain electoral advantage. Grell was accused of telling one prospective voter that her opponent, Cllr Barry Smith, a gay man in a civil partnership, was a paedophile who had a 16 year old boyfriend. Mr Smith’s partner is 39. Mr Smith was subsequently abused in the street for being a paedophile.
Stonewall have made various recommendations as a result of their report:
- Political parties should actively encourage lesbianand gay people to become MPs, MSPs, AMs and local councillors. Similar initiatives should be put in place for lesbian and gay people to those already in place for women and ethnic minorities.
- The Electoral Commission should encourage registered political parties to abide by a code of conduct prohibiting campaigning based on discriminatory attitudes to sexual orientation, race, disability, gender or gender identity, belief or age.
- Political parties should state that they will deselect any candidates who engage in homophobic campaigning.
- Local political parties should engage with their gay constituents to encourage lesbian and gay people to participate in the political process.
- Political parties should take measures consistent with their own rules and political philosophies to encourage lesbian and gay members to stand as candidates and to help them win selection.
- Government, with the support of all political parties, should appoint more lesbian and gay people, on merit, to public office and the House of Lords and so enable gay people to become more visible in public life.
21 Jun 2008
National Delegates Conference - Disabled Members Officer
"Louise Ashworth National LGBT Delegate and a disabled member opposing this rule amendment.
The LGBT group have not taken the decision to oppose another self-organised group lightly.
But this rule amendment is not about disabled members self-organisation – it is about branch organisation, about equalities in general and about member representation. This rule amendment has an impact on members of all of the self-organised groups and could create a precedent of how we may be represented in the future.
A motion at Disabled Members Conference proposed a Disability Officer to work specifically on behalf of disabled members because disabled people encounter particular disadvantage in the workforce.
We are not denying that disabled members do face particular disadvantage but so do our Black members, our women members and our lgbt members. Will this just be the start of a barrage of rule amendments being submitted in the future?
Various reasons have been mooted why the post is required - employers not taking the DED seriously and more recently we were told that it is intended to be a caseworker taking on cases such as health and safety, sickness absence and capability hearings.
This rule amendment introduces a quagmire of equality and member representation at branch level and should be opposed. The amendment undermines the role of the equality officer, self organisation and workplace representatives. It introduces a hierarchy of equality epresentation and discrimination at branch level that we as a union have strived to overcome.
The rule book, code of good branch practice and guidance on self organisation already provide opportunity for branches to elect a disabled members officer and for members of self organised groups to be represented on the branch committee. But only 60% of branches have equalities officers whereas a fifth of all branches already have Disabled Members Officers in place.
This rule change proposes a Disabled Members Officer who may not be disabled and will not be elected by disabled members and may not have any connections with the branch disabled members self organised group.
The union has secured funding from the union modernisation fund for the workplace equality representatives project. This rule amendment confuses the aims of the project and should be opposed.
The key representatives for members in workplace issues are stewards – and equality is a workplace issue.
If a steward needs specialist advice on my disability, they can talk to me. If they need specialist advice on disability equality then can turn to the structures UNISON already has in place. It is every activist’s duty to take equality seriously. We should be all for one. Not one for all who are disabled or lgbt for that matter. Please oppose."
The result was For 538,903. Against 559,604. Amendment Lost. Majority Against 21,511.
For the truth behind the right of reply, read here.
A briefing paper has been produced to the reasons why the LGBT Group were opposed. I have read a few comments on blogs that the reasons we were opposed was the method in which the rule change had been approached i.e., without consultation. With or without consultation, the poposal is ill thought out and it is likely that our position would have remained the same. the arguments supporting the position were weak. It was suggested that it would help disabled people achieve in public life if they were elected into such positions. However, the very fact that the position does not have to be a disabled member means that is not necessarily the case. The mover stated that 881 branches already have Disabled Members Officers thereby proving that there is already provision for the position to exist. The argument that a DMO would deal with health and safety cases undermines workplaces and health and safety representatives and also detracts from the specialist area of disability equality. There is also an underlying current of medicalisation of disability and a movement away from self organisation to facilitation of disabled members. I even heard a comment that allowing should means that it would be easier for disabled people who have not disclosed their disability to take up the position. However, how could you then distinguish or share preference between the disable person who has not disclosed their disability and the non-disabled erson who run in a contested election? Nonsense.
UNISON National Delegate Conference - Women into Public Life
The LGBT group believed this motion shows that as a society we still have a long way to go to achieving gender equality particularly when it comes to politics and public life.
Therefore we particularly welcomed the launch of the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Women Councillors Taskforce this May by Harriet Harman. The cross party taskforce which will take practical action is intended to help more black, Asian and minority ethnic women to become councillors and will be done through a series of activities such as outreach into communities and mentoring. Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic women account for less than 1% of England’s 20,000 councillors. Only 2 of the 19.5% of the women MPs come from Minority Ethnic communities. There has never been an Asian woman MP.
We also welcome the Government’s announcement that the Equality Bill will include provision for political parties to allow the adoption of all-women shortlists until 2030.
As far as LGBT women, in 2008, there is only one ‘out’ lesbian politician in the House of Commons and none in the House of Lords. There are no out Trans MPs or Lords. And no-one who has said that they are bi-sexual.
Stonewall have just produced a report ‘Serves You Right’ - lesbian and gay people’s expectations of discrimination. A you.gov survey was carried out and found that the majority of lesbians and gay people expect to experience discrimination if they seek election by a political party or run for parliament. And Women are more likely to think this as two thirds of lesbians thought they would be discriminated against. Local politics was not much different.
Stonewall have recommended that political parties actively encourage their LGB members to run for positions and agree to deselect any candidate who engages in homophobic campaigning. Stonewall is a LGB campaigning group and obviously UNISON’s lgbt group would extend this to Trans people as well.
This year UNISON submitted a motion to LGBT Labour on increasing the effective participation of women. LGBT Labour has launched Dorothys List, a campaigning fund to support LGBT candidates particularly women running for election.
It's not just going to be a clicking of the heels for us to get into public life. We have a long journey ahead of us even down the red brick road.
UNISON Organising for Equality
The pilot project will assess how the role of "Equality Rep" can help branches negotiate around equalities particularly in relation to the public sector duties on disability, race and gender. It is proposed that the work of the Rep will include:
- working with the Branch Equality Officer to advocate for good equality practices in the workplace
- raising awareness within the workplace of the work the union and the branch does around equality
- encouraging the branch to prioritise equality issues
- signposting members with potential equality related cases to branch stewards.
Equality is a workplace issue and equality is the responsibility of everyone in UNISON. Our members are best represented in workplace issues by our accredited workplace representatives and stewards.
UNISON has produced guidance on self organisation which states that
When members need union representation in a workplace matter, this is usually provided by their elected workplace representative or steward. All union reps should be competent and confident in carrying out their role and be able to deal with all issues of equality and discrimination, while knowing how to access specialist advice when needed.
The equality reps supported by the Branch Equality Officer is intended to be able to provide that specialist advice and if needed they can also seek support from the branch self organised group if there is one in existence.
This is a new and exciting way of organising for equality and comes at a time when UNISON has also introduced the unison equality scheme.
National Delegate Conference - Motion 63 - New Labour: What do we get for our Money? - My view
As a LGBT person I can tell you exactly what I have got for my money from New Labour:
- an equal age of consent
- an end to discrimination against my partner for immigration purposes
- the right to adopt children
- the scrapping of Section 28 (Clause 2a in Scotland)
- the banning of discrimination in the workplace and in vocational training with the introduction of the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations
- the creation of the Equality and Human Rights Commission giving LGBT people statutory body protection
- the widening of the definition of hate crimes, and increased sentencing for homophobic hate crimes
- the removal of outdated offences such as gross indecency and buggery
- the Gender Recognition Act, allowing Trans people to have their true gender recognised in law
- the Civil Partnerships Act, allowing me to have my relationships recognised in law and have the same benefits as a married couple
- discrimination in good and services outlawed
- And we await a draft single equality act which will be lost if the Tories get in power
Much of what has been achieved is because of the voices and opinions of trade unionists and (LGBT Labour activists) within the party and in my view the weakening of that link will silence our voice even more.
At a time when we are in real danger of facing the prospect of a Tory government, we should be rallying together not dividing because that is what the Tories want. A party that is divided. Trade Unions turning their back on the party that we built. Spending time reviewing the link when we have more urgent things to get on with like defeating the BNP and the Tories.
I am not saying that New Labour has not made some drastic mistakes and that we have had a battle on our hands and still do. I am not saying that our public services have been put under pressure, that our pay does not matter, that our pensions don’t and that our rights as trade unionists should be eroded. We still have a battle. But with the Tories it would be a war. It would not be positively public. It would be positively private. UNISON – the private service union.
I choose to pay into the affiliated political fund and it is financed solely by members who pay the levy not by the general membership.
Arguments for Keeping the 'Blood Ban'?
About 2,700 gay men in the UK were diagnosed with HIV in 2006 - double the number a decade earlier. Theses represent about a third of all new cases that year. The Terence Higgins Trust says funding for prevention work among gay men is under threat and that there is not enough discussion of the issue within the gay community. Will Nutland from THT comments here.
Craig has blogged previously about gay men and blood donation.
Also see BBC News and Pink News
European Disability Forum Opposed to Horizontal Directive
After adoption by the Commissioners, the proposal will go to European Council. At this stage, the proposed text will be up for negotiations by Member States. This process is likely to be long since a directive related to non-discrimination (i.e. based on Article 13 of the EU Treaty) needs to be adopted unanimously, i.e. by ALL Member States.
But now there is news that that the European Disability Forum is opposing the horizontal directive on the basis that a single directive "may not respond to the needs of a group as diverse as persons with disabilities. We face not only attitudinal, but also structural discrimination, and it is only by addressing barriers in the society that such discrimination can be removed. We fear that these specificities of disability-based discrimination may be diluted by the broad scope of the proposed legislation." The oncerns have been raised in an open letter to Commissioner Barroso. Obviously these are genuine concerns but can be dealt with in the scope of a strong, single directive. This has been a similar concern raised over the Single Equality Bill in the UK but we have campaigned long and hard for levelling up not watering down. The danger is that other groups will be left out in the cold with limited rights.
The case for a single directive:
ILGA-Europe (The European Region of the International Lesbian and Gay Association) and the
European Network Against Racism (ENAR) have been arguing for the need to propose a single horizontal anti-discrimination Directive, covering the grounds of age, disability, religion/belief and sexual orientation. Here is a summary of arguments in favour of a single equality legislation. A single comprehensive legislation is the most effective way to ensure legal clarity and coherence in relation to levels of protection against discrimination. Experience has shown that a harmonized and coherent single legislation is easier to implement than a legislative framework fragmented by grounds. A single piece of legislation considerably increases the ability to adopt a consistent approach and to deal effectively with any inconsistencies and/or tensions that may rise between grounds of discrimination. It is for similar reasons that countries like the United Kingdom which had ground-specific legislation have been moving towards single equality legislation.
- A single legislation provides individuals with a clear means to know their rights across the
EU. Having separate laws leads to fragmented legislation which has been shown to be confusing to the public in many countries. - A single directive offers maximum legal clarity for businesses and other providers of goods
and services. A harmonized legislation would mean that employers and service providers can rely on a coherent, transparent, accessible and easily understood body of law to be informed about their obligations. A single comprehensive legislation is the most effective way to ensure that all grounds of discrimination are treated equally and to address multiple discrimination: - Creating separate rules for different grounds of discrimination often creates significant barriers to dealing with multiple discrimination. For instance, different definitions of direct discrimination and indirect discrimination, or the different material scope of legislation from one ground to another would make it difficult, if not impossible, to address multiple discrimination.
- A single directive underlines the human rights nature of the issue of discrimination regardless of the discrimination ground and enables potential conflicts of rights to be addressed within the human rights framework, avoiding any actual or perceived hierarchy of human rights. A single initiative CAN address the specificities of the different types of discrimination:
- It is the opinion of several well-respected European legal experts that the specific needs of the grounds of sexual orientation, religion or belief, disability and age can be equally met within single equality legislation. The different range of provisions that may be necessary to respond to the characteristics of each ground of discrimination (such as reasonable accommodation for disability or preferential treatments related to age) can be integrated in a horizontal directive, for instance under different chapters.
- The Employment Framework Directive 2000/78 already demonstrates how European legislation can combine general provisions applying to all grounds with specific provisions addressing the different context of certain grounds (e.g. the reasonable accommodation duty). Proposing a horizontal directive is the most effective way to ensure the strong
endorsement of a wide-ranging coalition of supporters - A single directive that fully addresses the specificities of each ground would be supported by a wide coalition of NGOs working on human rights, equality and non-discrimination and social issues at European and national level. It would support and strengthen social cohesion as well as solidarity between the grounds.
- Representatives from some States have clearly expressed to ILGA-Europe and ENAR that they will be more willing to agree to EU legislation on some grounds of discrimination as part of a “package”, which they consider to be easier to introduce in their country. Fragmenting the grounds of discrimination in different pieces of discrimination will open up the door to “trading” in negotiations and allow for States to have an “a la carte” approach to legislation whereby they can choose the grounds of discrimination they wish to see protected and those grounds they wish to reject. Due to the need for unanimity, this could result in no protection for any ground.
- A single legislation would also receive the support of several political parties, of trade unions, as well as of European and national human rights institutions and equality bodies.
UNISON Rules Debate - Putting the Record Straight
The NDMC decided to submit the rule amendment and the first the NLGBTC became aware of this would have been on the publication of the preliminary agenda, but for the NLGBTC rep on NDMC being aware this was a possibility. However, the NLGBTC only become formally aware on publication of NDC preliminary agenda. At no time did the NDMC chairs contact any of the other National SOG Committee chairs. The NLGBTC Co-chairs were concerned about the implications of the creation of the post and wrote to the Co-chairs of the NDMC expressing these concerns prior to the next Equality Liaison meeting in April 2008. At that meeting, no useful discussion took place between the SOGs about the rule amendment and there was definately no consultation but the NLGBTC did put the NDMC and the NEC on notice that they were considering opposing the rule amendment.
Following this, a formal ballot took place of all members of the NLGBTC who overwhelmingly voted in favour of opposing both the NDMC and Suffolk County rule amendments. Motions have been passed at previous LGBT conferences on self organisation and equality representation.
The National Womens Committee met at a later date and discussed the rule amendment with opposition being voiced. National Black Members Committee also met and discussed the rule amendment and as their delegate said that although they decided to speak in support the issue of whether or not to support went to a vote so was not achieved by consensus.
There was a meeting of the National Disabled Members Committee at the end of May 2008 and the NLGBTC reps on the committee once again were open and transparant about the opposition to the rule amendment and were even prepared to put some of the arguments forward. However, again there was limited discussion as to the reasons why the NLGBTC is opposed to the creation of such a post but more to the fact that it was disgraceful that another self organised group is opposing the NDMC!
A further equality liaison meeting was held at the start of June 2008 and once again the NLGBTC co-chairs raised their opposition including some of the reasons (and quite strongly) in the meeting to both the NEC and NDMC in the presence of the other self organised groups and Young Members Officer. Again, the NDMC would not enter into a discussion and the only discussion was between the NLGBTC and the NEC on this matter.
Finally, on the day of the debate, we even published some of our reasons why we were opposed in our conference newssheet.
The national LGBT group has been honest and transparant and tried to enter into dialogue with the NDMC from the moment that the preliminary agenda was published but without any response. We still have not received a response to the e-mail we sent to the NDMC co-chairs in April.
Trevor Phillips addresses NDC - The conscience of our Nation
UNISON elects new President
Tory MP states that gender reassignment surgery is a choice
Aceessing gender reassignment surgery is already difficult and as one of UNISON's Trans members recently said " until we can get full and equal access across the uK from the NHS it is a post code lottery. Trans people will continue to have to relocate to access treatment leaving potentially vulnerable people unemployed and totally isolated and at greater risk of mental ill health including suicide and self harm".
This is echoed in Krissie's comments on the Pink News article.
Visit Press for Change website to read more about the difficulties that Trans people face in accssing treatment and the discrimination they face.
UNISON withdraws support from RISE festival
UNITE has also pulled funeding because Johnson refused a platform for the Cuba Solidarity Campaign saying that it was a political campaign group and therefore unacceptable.
Read more: Guardian News. NAAR's Reaction. BNP support Johnson's decision.
Also see Johnson aide quits over race row
Dave Prentis addresses Conference
20 Jun 2008
UNISON National Delegate Conference - Official Reporting
The annual report
Gun and Knife Crime
Defending the minimum wage
Shared services
Diversity is not the problem
General Secretary's Address
Violence and aggression against staff
Support for Vulnerable Workers
Celebrate and Defending the NHS
Defending In-house services
Equal Pay funding
Widening Wealth Gap
Marketisation Threat
Teaching Assistants
Solidarity with Southern Africa
Gaza Siege Condemned
Colombia. Also read here.
Burma
Flexicurity
Ending the two-tier workforce
Zimbabwean Unions Discuss Support
Responsible contractor policy for pensions
In pictures
Video
Tanker drivers offered 14% over 2 years
15 Jun 2008
UNISON National Delegate Conference
The Big Anglican Gay Wedding
The Reverend Peter Cowell and the Reverend Dr David Lord were already civil partners.
The couple are said to have exchanged vows and rings in front of hundreds of guests.
14 Jun 2008
Hamish Howitt to stand gainst David Davis
Shell shocked
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has urged both sides of the dispute to resume negotiations, adding that contingency plans were in place to minimise the effects of the walkout. This has gained criticism particularly from the Left who see Brown as attacking the very right of trade unionists to strike:
"In a further erosion of our civil liberties, the Government has briefed the press that it is threatening to invoke emergency powers, contained within the Civil Contingencies Act, in the oil tanker drivers' dispute to draft in soldiers to drive the tankers. The drivers are members of UNITE. There is widespread concern within Parliament about these proposals as MPs have tabled EDM 1761 (full text at end) on this issue. John McDonnell MP, LRC Chair, said
"Just after the vote on 42 days detention you thought the assault on people's civil liberties couldn't get worse. When the Government introduced the Civil Contingencies Act many of us warned that it would be used against trade unionists and this latest threat from Downing Street confirms our concerns that emergency powers could be used to undermine trade union rights.
Just at a time when there are attempts to achieve a negotiated settlement to the tanker drivers' dispute this inflammatory threat will exacerbate the situation and undermine the potential for resolving the dispute." Matt Wrack, FBU General Secretary, said: "The FBU is extremely concerned about the potential of the Civil Contingencies Act to be used to organise strike-breaking. There is no evidence that the UK fire service has ever failed to respond adequately to the seriousness of terrorist events. We believe that some employers, with the encouragement of the Government, are using this legislation to organise strike-breaking activities that can only undermine good industrial relations. We would urge the Government to avoid inflammatory actions against trade unions in the event of industrial action".
-Ends-
That this House regrets that Government sources this week have threatened the use of emergency powers against striking tanker drivers, who are members of Unite, including through the drafting-in of soldiers to drive tankers for oil companies; and believes this inflammatory threat sets back the process of achieving a negotiated settlement in this dispute.
John McDonnell Jeremy Corbyn Peter Bottomley Kelvin Hopkins Linda Riordan