Posts
Manchester Withington Selection: Constituency Demographics
On old boundaries, Withington had:
6.7% Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi
2.5% Chinese
0.8% of "Other Asians"
0.97% Black
3.98% "Other not white"
These tally these up to 14.95%.
The Chorlton ED that was part of Whalley Range/Central had 1528 people in 2001. Almost 40% of these were classed as not white-British. With a large proportion in the Pakistan, Bangla or other Muslim communities.
Recent local intelligence suggests:
That the population has grown quite strongly in the last six years.
That this growth is concentrated in Asian Communities and graduate ABC1 with some overlap.
That 16 to 17% of the constituency electorate will be BME on polling day.
Including a considerable element of rising 18s.
That more than half of these will be from Asian Muslim communities.
The demographic of the Student Cohort (below) has increasing BME representation.
THIS provides a fascinating treasure trove of demographics by ward, by Special Output Area (SOA) and also for comparison in larger areas, regions and of course nationally.
It is estimated that there are 3,500 to 4,000 students and expected that substantially more than the 1 to 2% of this group voting in most elections will participate. With a strong antipathy to both the War and New Labour.
4 comments:
I have a bone to pick with you, in a comradely context, of course.
Dave Osler's place:
"Our Labour Students joined in a grand alliance with Tories and Libs called Students First AHEAD of the elections. They scored Four Sabbs and about 20 of 30 Exec places overall. No idea how the party split is between the "grown up" parties who see themselves in an existential struggle against the "childish" and "anti-semite" respect/I-soc grouping.
I worry about this false dichotomy steering good islamic comrades away from the LP in particular and acting directly against Labour's equality objectives when good BME candidates from earlier generation are against LS/NOLS folk.
In Manchester Withington Selection which I am blogging it has been alleged that all students were leant on by current NOLS pres to back a particular nominee. Said pres had done a placement with said nominee and both said to be towards centre right in LP terms."
Indeed we did. Imagine you were in a situation where you were forced by STV into coalition Chris. Would you do it with the libdems and tories, small groups over whom you have an element of influence, or the massive, centrally administered SWP bloc, staffed by legions of people who believe that Israel has no right to exist?
Chris. You don't know what goes on on our campus, and until you've had time to take an in depth case study, I would reccomend that your opinion remains strongly qualified as such.
These people don't make legitimate criticisms of Israel. The twinning motion they decided to bring up was with a university that actively encouraged militant groups to recruit suicide bombers at it's freshers' fair. 19 suicide bombers have come from the university in question, acting in such comradely faashions as blowing civillians, complete with children, to pools of bloody smithereens in mediterranian cafes.
The people pushing this motion know this. If they had wanted to emphasise legitimate solidarity with the oppressed people of palestine, they were quite open to do so. tThe vast bulk of Jewish students on campus are quite open to suggestions of thrinning, or even, as was claimed in the speeches, willing to consider twinning offers with moderate campusses. But this motion came directly from the SWP nomenclature as part of a centreally orchestrated, national assualt, planned by people who believe that attacks on civillians in Israel is legitimate resistance to a country which has no right to exist.
Chris. Considering the amount the SWP, indeed much like myself, like to bring up issues of international law with regard to Iraq, don't you think it is time they started paying attention to the decisions of the United Nations in the 19 fucking 50s?
Chris. MULC have done absolutely nothing to repel muslim students. NOLS and the federation of Islamic Societies have poor national relations with msulim student's organisations, not because of the nature of those organisations, but because of their pernicious alliance with RepSect.
At NUS conference this year, respect and FOSIS transferred to a right wing indie for VP welfare, despite the good work that the NOLS candidate had done for muslims on his home campus, ie. extending prayer facilities etc.
The general union of palestinian students surrounded UJS delegates this year with megaphones shouting 'stop the jews, stop the crime'.
A similar atmosphere has been created on campus. It is one where Jewish students have been assualted purely for wearing kippahs. This stuff isn't coming from muslim students, it's all traceable back to respect, which has a great political interest in sewing racial and religious disharmony; it gives it a core vote, and make capitalist society unstable; at least, in their silly little heads.
In reality, it makes life a misery for minorities.
Now MULC are quite willing to protect muslim students from racism n campus too, but UJS aren't submitting 'crush the arab terrorist' motions, because they are what we call REASONABLE.
With regard to us being 'leant on', I'm on the Exec of our club myself, and I haven't been contacted by anyone. What you are saying is patently untrue, and completely without corroboration. Don't you have better things to do than spout untruths about comrades?
For the most part, we support Lucy because we believe that she is in most of our views the best candidate for Withington. Club members are quite free to dissent from that view. There has been no element of coercion on club exec members from head office. Nor has there been any element even of persuasion (even if there was, it's doubtful whether it would recieve any currency)!
The only actual pressure or intimidation that has been applied to us has certainly not been from Lucy Powell or her team. That's as far as I'm willing to go on that.
Returning to my previous topic, I was as appalled at the Iraq war and the events in Lebanon as anyone else. I am equally disenheartened by the actions of a militaristc Israeli government. But that does not mean that I agree with the creation of an atmosphere hostile to any minority group on campus, and it does not mean that I am willing to let persistent motions in solidarity with terrorists who commit atrocious deeds to pass.
We don't have to agree with Tories and libdems over anything at all. Where we do agree is that we should lay off the jews, and keep any criticism of Israel reasonable.
This is the bottom line. It's not us who are transgressing that line, it is respect. If anyone is to blame for turning muslims away from the Labour party, it is probably a combination of them, and indeed our irrespnsible friend, Jack Straw.
I am not willing to tolerate SWP claptrap to have our islamic society back on board. So our strategy has been to aim at the SWP to remove the cancer.
That's about all I have to say about that. You might want to try talking to Labour people instead of Rob Owen and co to get your explanations in the future.
Tom Miller
Treasurer
Manchester Labour Students
Dear Tom
Thanks for the effort you have clearly put into this genuine response to the opinion that I have blogged over at Dave's.
Please be assured that :
(a) I have a genuine and I think very well founded concern about the way politics is going in our Students Unions and as a Graduate and a Life Member of University of Manchester I am particularly interested in what occurs there.
(b) I have been in continuous contact with the student body at UoM since leaving in 1982 and I have followed SU events with more or less interest throughout this period. Some might argue that this gives me some context, perspective and distance which is not so easily available to current students, Labour or otherwise.
(c) As you may know I have blogged extensive criticism of Respect's lines and processes on this blog. Most recently with reference to the Selection which has started in Bethnal Green and Bow. I don't think you have commented there but you are welcome to do so if you wish.
(d) You are putting quite a lots of words into my mouth and so on here. Things I have never said or written or thought in fact. I have never said what I blog here is anything other than facts I know or have heard (in which case I DO qualify them - "I've heard", "people are saying" "one source says" or words to that effect.
(e) I have every right to hold an opinion about the dichotomy of Labour (or Student First) and J-Soc and Respect and I-Soc. My concern about this does not mean I don't respect J-Soc's position or that I support the Respect/I-Soc alternative.
(f) In my day there were student politicians who also seemed to be Jewish in each and every student political society. While largely and understandably united on certain issues these students had a whole range of positions on other matters. And in that sense the alliance makes more sense in a largely services-orientated Students First alliance across the spectrum than the former Lab/J-Soc link which was to my eyes more problematic.
(g) Whatever you have done here, and I appreciate the comradely manner of your representations, advice, opinions, whatever you'd like to call it, you have not convinced me to think different on either the dichotomy or the potential damage to LP recruitment from both Islamic students and students and young people in general.
(h) I understand the Student First project quite well actually and am personally far more comfortable with e.g. the Lab-Con year in Rochdale than many of my comrades. It made perfect sense to me. And I don't think I'm even critical of it. Just reporting that there was a grand alliance. Fished for information re the break down of those elected which is yet to land any catch. And I do think the grown-up/childish dichotomy is reasonable as well. Trots can be infuriating (op cit) in these ways. And so I suppose can "serious" student pollies. In quite different ways. But both groups can also be trojans with an important contribution to make when work needs to be done.
You may not want to go and do XY and Z action or demonstration yourself. But in some of these cases you may feel glad that others are doing it?
(i) There are a couple of difficulties with Rochdale and possibly with this alliance which is of course how they relate to the wider world. e.g. Local government politics in Rochdale, Manchester etc. And second, how others see us. There is already a meme among the broad population and the media as well as the same line from Respect etc on the main parties which is "all the same". "red tories, blue tories, yellow tories" etc A very sensible alliance to improve Services and be managerial is all very well but it could back this meme.
I don't think I've had any information that I've blogged from Rob Owen on ANY of this stuff. There are better sources and try as they might they cannot unfree information that they have previously freed.
The story about LS backing for a certain candidate being pushed from afar has been told to a goodly number of people and to an extent that is corroboration. Then again it could also be viral disinformation.
However, while I am quite content to believe that a relatively small number of students in the CLP came to their conclusions on who to back on the merits of the "politics" (and though I didn't agree with that choice by any means I am as united as the next comrade in backing the people's choice) but having lurked round SUs for a shockingly long time myself, and LP politics for almost as long, I would find it unlikely that no calls came in from town on this one.
You and yours might also consider the huge number of stories that I get given or observe but don't blog at all, or in full, or whatever.
Ther are dozens if not hundreds of my personal anecdotes and collective ones about this selection campaign (and the loosely associated events around it) that could be blogged today, tomorrow or next week. But you'll not be reading them here.
I'm not even planning to blog anything about the candidate's speeches or Q and As. Though I may well write something soon about the question I managed to get asked to all five nominees and why I think that that is so desperately important.
On the other hand that too, or most of it, could be kept for the privacy of our own party and our own planning process.
If you want to tell me btw which factual points and reports in the three paragraphs you quote at the front end you actually dispute? Beyond that what I worry about and my point of view is for me to know and you to find out by reading here.
A specific example would be the last para where I repeat an allegation (or some might say a revelation) rather than claiming to have first hand knowledge, certainty that it is correct, or anything of the kind. The second sentence too is a continuation of that allegation - which may or may not be true - but which has never been gainsayed by anyone.
The idea that I support certain Respect/I-Soc lines on Israel is potty and unfounded. The idea of twinning with a suicide bombing baccalaureat could not be further from mind.
On the other hand being unhappy with links from UK towns to occupied territory settlements - particularly if they appear connected to the LP - that's true enough. And being in favour of more links with communities in Palestine, guilty as charged. And excited by e.g. Mosaic Housing - also guilty.
But none of these interests are the same as "being Hezbollah", "cheer leading for suicide killers", being anti-semitic or denying Israel's right to exist. Or even being a commie or a revolutionary or a trot. All of these things being thrown at anyone who even speaks to a CLP motion on related areas.
I regard that as bullying.
Best wishes, thanks for taking the trouble
Chris P
Cheers for your response Chris. I take it all rather to heart. We've put in an awful lot of hours thinking about our position with regard to the union, and it has to a degree worked. I've slugged my guts out to beat those trots.
With regard to our Islamic society, our hand is always open. We are keener than ever to rebuild relations, and shall be attempting to do so having appointed a new chair for the half-year to come. We have ben in dialogue with certain MPs as to how we can get this to take place. I don't deny for a second that the sectarian politics is bad for the party. What enrages me further is how bad it is for the community.
But, we've been put in a situation that's a tough one to deal with. We have the following givens:
1) A national Federation of Islamic Students which is anti-Labour and allied to respect
2) A local Islamic society which is anti-Labour, and allied to respect
(both having bought the 'seperate yourselves', non-muslims must be islamaphobes' conception hook, line and sinker)
3) A local Action Palestine society run by proxies of the PFLP.
4)An Islamic society who doesn't understand what such people are really about, and reckon that they're campaigning for some notion of justice, peace (!) or vaguely defined 'free Palestine'.
5)An SWP armed to the teeth with the most divisive motions it can find (and will refuse to amend, lining itself and Isoc attendees to vote down any anti-John Rees amendment), and a willingness to take advantage of the situation.
Place this into a context where
1) There is a block vote of 900 extremely electorally disciplined Islamic society members...
2) ...In electoral alliance with the SWP
3) In organisational subservience to the SWP and Action Palestine.
4) An reasonable but apathetic union membership which has been driven away by the emphasis on high political issues.
5) An SWP exec with an undemocratically obtained constitution that looks like the Enabling Act, and a fanatical urge, on the basis of the previous point, to keep turnout down, thus empowering its block.
6) A small minority of politically diverse, though mostly zionist jews, whose nationality is constantly under attack. People that have now semi-humorously taken to referring to Rob O. as 'Haman'.
7) LibDems who always stand against the whole slate you form in response on principle (!), and tories who would fill the gap if they did not, provided they could be bothered.
8) Shitloads of other societies broadly aligned with real Labour politics but are intentionally rather ignorant and determined to ignore the political.
That's a recipe for hate, I agree. It's bad for Labour, I agree.
So much for interpreting the world Chris... how would you change it? Avoid making the shite you get to start with into a brand new turd?
Stage one? Services all the way. Get the normals out to vote, and represented. Break down the elitist blocs.
Stage two: consolidate.
Stage 3: Progress.
Stage 4: consensus.
I'm convinced you'd do the same as us. I came to this university a campaign group supporter. It's not Labour that changed that. Its evil trots. They leave you with nowhere to go but rightwards.
The SWP's tantrum strategy has alienated thousands of students from the hard left (I'm a softie all the way). Any look at NUS conference this year will tell you that. People are sick of being blasted in the face by middle class white people with dreadlocks.
In respect to the position of students 1st, I think this year should be about us proving how different we all really are. Students 1st was built around a single issue, which is the domination of foreign policy on the union agenda. Respect are successful because they do the same think from the other direction. But we're not as supine as them.
The three main parties are clearly not all the same. But respect are right when they say that we're more simlar to each other than we are to them, at least, in the sense of the priorities of what we wish to discuss. That's why respect make shit councillors. Unlike the rest, they don't give a toss about bus times and street cleaning.
The others all disagree about it, but they accept it as an important issue.
That's our union in one neat analogy. The bins are starting to spill over.
With regards to the selection, I am aware that nobody has refuted the allegations which you have repeated, because none of us want to be seen as interfering in an open forum with the procedures of the selection, despite our recent affiliation and thus entitlement to do so. We also have a consensus that debating these things outside of a Labour consensus has the potential to be damaging and is best avoided. However, the selection comes to an end today, so we might as well set things straight. There was no leaning. On anyone. I haven't been leant on myself, and neither have any club members. And I'm on the exec!
It's not really fair. If someone was being libelled, you wouldn't repeat it without getting corroboration first. Good thing nobody's individual reputation is at stake here.
I do not wish to concern myself with who has been putting this about at this point; suffice it to say that you can consider the allegation refuted.
I appreciate that this is a little strongly worded, for which I apologise, but I am rather wound up.
You can however take what I've said to day, in terms of content, to be the opinion of our club more generally. I've been consulting.
Now I'm off to sort out my dissertation. Give it a few weeks and I'll be out leafleting.
All the best
TM
MULC
Thanks El Tom - all points taken. I do understand, really I do. And I am not set against S1st, just sharing the model. Next step for you is to work out the critical success factors in getting the SU back to its real and proper jurisdiction. And then plan the next steps from largely successful first steps. The issue of the communalism could be the toughest one to crack.
My time at Uni was a boom time for ultra vires and some of the same things were playing out, though there were hardly any Libs and with our national politics and parties so very distinct there was no "you're all the same" line.
There is no point in worrying the facts or not of allegations made and reported. As you say I have not named names. Others haven't in comments. Or they have usually been removed or rebuked or both. Though I could line up a number of people that you currently consider more reliable than this blogger perhaps who would corroborate. It's history and the people's choice has been made by a large constituency of concerned and engaged citizens who are acting in good faith.
Enjoy your dissertation. Mine - on The Runoff of Meltwater in High Alpine Catchments - proved to be the highlight of my academic career and is still widely revered and cited when groups of Glaciologists commune.
Forwards, united, never divided, invicta etc
Best w
Chris P
Post a Comment