A penny per household

It appears that the animal rights party that stood against us in Southwark & Lambeth in the Greater London Assembly elections last year won't be standing in London. In their press release saying they'll be standing in the Eastern Region instead, they say:

"As part of the EU election regulations, we will have a free mail-out of our election leaflet. We can reach one household for just over one penny; for £13 we can print an extra 1,000 leaflets. This is a one-off opportunity to reach so many people so cheaply. We're looking to raise more funds in order to print 500,000 leaflets. "

We hadn't made this calculation, but they seem to have got a better deal than us, no doubt because we are only planning to get the Post Office to distribute 240,000 leaflets : 1.3p per household and £12 to print an extra 1,000 leaflets. Maybe we should be more ambitious . . .

Surveying the field

Well, since our nomination papers are in, we know who we are, and from the list on Wikipedia, a fair idea of who our rivals will be. Ten lists so far.

Of which four are nationalists of some stripe (UKIP, Libertas, BNP, English Democrats). So far, only Labour and the Green Party represent anything that can be called "the left" with the nationalists, plus the Tories being mainly on the right, and Jury Team and the Lib Dems bringing up the centre.

Anyway, I'll move one in future posts to examining party's manifestos...

To begin with, Labour. Although Labour will bring out their own manifesto, as part of the Party of European Socialists [sic] (PES) they will be committed to enacting this manifesto with their Parliamentary group. It makes for some interesting reading:

almost 17 million people in Europe [are] already out of work and many more in precarious jobs who are among the first to be hit by slow growth; the ever-present risk of home repossessions; and social inequalities, with some 78 million people – many of them children – living below the poverty line or at risk of poverty.

As ever, reformists are good at diagnosing the ills, but fail with their prescription. Their proposal? Regulate the markets. That's going to work. Honest. Of course, wing nut free marketeers nowadays try and blame market regulation for the crisis. After all, the markets are already regulated, it just didn't work.

We'd argue, though, that it can't work, that any system based on the market will eventually fall over. That issue, though, is going to be at the real centre of European politics though, regulation versus deregulation, for some time to come. The stale battle between capitalist parties.

Capitalist Parties? Oh, yes, that the piece of analysis I forgot, all but one of the parties standing is a faction of the capitalist party, there are ten lists, but only two parties. Go on, make the choice between capitalism or socialism, not what flavour capitalism you get.

Nomination Day

The nominations paper were handed in at 11 o'clock this morning. We were the first. They were accepted as valid. Also handed in was the £5000 deposit (which we'll get back if we get 2.5% of the votes cast).

One anomaly is that, being a list election, the full registered name of the parties contesting will appear on the ballot paper as well as any variant of their names they may have used on the nomination papers. We used, as in previous elections, "The Socialist Party (GB)", so both our full name and the variant will appear on the ballot paper. But this is how the Electoral Commission and the Returning Officers have decided to interpret the law. If we had chosen to put our full name this would have appeared twice.

Another anomaly -- in fact a stupidity -- is that the full registered name of the parties contesting will determine the order on the ballot paper in which the lists appear. But "The" is to count as the first word where this is included in the registered name, as it will be for most parties. So nearly all the lists will be under T. Another Electoral Commission and Returning Officers decision. Now if we'd called ourselves Aardwark Socialist Party then we'd be first . . .

Candidate admits error - shocker!

I was wrong, I misremembered the address on the posters, it was actually www.elections2009.eu I saw on the poster, and that is an EU advert for the EU's elections - essentially a political campaign to get people to support the election by voting. Here are some gems from their top ten list of reasons to vote:

It’s a small effort for a big outcome
Come on! It’s just a few minutes, maybe you can combine it with a walk in the park or a drink in a café. Not much effort to tell Europe what you want. After that it’s easy to follow what your elected members are doing for you - just visit www.europarl.europa.eu!
It’s for people and prosperity!
Young or old, student or retired, man or woman, employed or independent, mainstream or alternative, town or countrydweller, Europe concerns all of us, often without us realising! Thanks to Europe, we can easily travel, study and work abroad. The EP works tirelessly for a cleaner environment, safer chemicals, better services and jobs. It is an ardent defender of consumer rights, equal opportunities and human rights both in the EU and abroad.
In the pipeline, even weightier MEPs
With the new Lisbon Treaty, once it can be implemented, MEPs’ decision-making powers over EU affairs will once more increase. It will place the Parliament on an equal footing as lawmaker with Member States’ ministers in virtually all areas of EU policy. The Parliament will also elect the President of the European Commission, strengthening its control over the EU executive. Furthermore, you as an EU citizen will have a right to initiate European laws.

Really, a very weak list of reasons to vote, pathetic even. We suggest a better reason to vote: to pursue your class interest by letting your fellow workers know you are opposed to capitalism, and getting ever more of us to bring our weight round to that end. Not consumer rights, nor extra competences for parliamentarians (who will become, gasp, the equals of Ministers and Eurocrats). The best reason to vote is revolt.

Putting the case

I went along, last night, to see Richard Headicar of the Socialist Party debating with John Meadowcroft an academic supporter of capitalism. Due to regent's Park football kick-about commitments, I missed the start.

What I was very interested to hear was the end. In his summation Meadowcroft basically abandoned defending capitalism, and resorted to the tried and tested "it's the least worst system we've got." A great rallying cry of conservatives throughout the ages.

Even more significantly, he ditched egalitarianism. It's often overlooked, that Adam Smith's strongest argument for the market was an egalitarian one. He argued that wages were equal (although they might command different money prices, the irksomeness or ease of the job would balance out over the cost, he claimed). More prosaically, his invisible hand was meant to indicate that pursuit of private trade could assist the general good (a useful selection of Smith quotes can be found here).

How could you look someone in the eye and ask them to be the poor part of society?

If that's the best that an ardent supporter of capitalism can muster now, they're in trouble. Let's hope for more opportunities to expose this weakness soon.

Caring

You may have seen posters around London, urging you to consider the issues covered by the European Parliamentary elections: work life balance, the environment, etc. Now, at first I thought this was the European commission engaged in a voter drive, a political act which the UK government is guilty of often.

In the UK, the electoral commission spend thousands on adverts promoting voting. Choosing not to vote is a political choice - after all, if you think voting is pointless; that the parties on offer won't represent you; if you simply think the body being elected is illegitimiate; or think the elections are fixed or otheriwse unfair; then it is perfectly reasonable to refuse to vote.

As it turned out, however, the website given on the posters www.vote2009.eu is actually something run by a group called CARE - a Christian activist coalition, or third party (as they're known in electoral law), trying to inform (i.e. influence) the vote.

This is a doozey:

In order to remind ourselves why withdrawing from the ballot box is a problem for the Christian, we must reflect on the implications of the Bible's endorsement of government and some of the problems associated with justifications for not voting. Christianity is 'for government'. There is no theological justification for anarchism. First, the Bible makes it plain that government is a good idea, instituted by God to create a legal framework that encourages right and restrains wrong (Romans 13, 1 Peter 2, 13-17, 1 Tim 2, 1-4). It also makes it clear that government doesn't always get it right (Isaiah 10. 1) and that the whole world, and thus including government, needs the projection of Christian salt and light (Matt 5. 13-20, Luke 8. 16).

And some wonder why we in the socialist party are hostile to religion. The above shows the whole problem. Firstly, that religions, in order to survive in the political world have accomodated themselves to the powerful, and thus become adroit at justifying the status quo. Further, their very existence is bound up with an appeal to authority - they say vote according to God's wishes (if you can guess what they are). A game of political "Simon Says". No wonder they find life without government hard to fathom.

We argue that indeed there isn't a need for the government of people, and that it can be replaced by co-operation and the administration of things. We don't need appeals to authority, but apeals to reason. We don't ask for votes based on appeals to loyalty or emotion - if you think common ownership is the solution to the worlds ills, indicate it by voting for us.

If you live, though, in a region where we haven't put up candidates, fine, don't vote for the parties that represent the continuation of capitalism. Or, as I've done in every election I've voted in for the past twelve years, postively abstain by spoiling your ballot paper (I write "World Socialism" across mine).

Presenting our candidates

Our executive committee approved a list of candidates and, in keeping with party tradition of "it's the case, not the face", decided that the order on the ballot paper would be decided randomly.

The criterion for being a Socialist Party candidate is demonstrably understanding the party's case. The EC had to choose from a list of people who have managed to prove that they can do that. All our candidates are equals within the party, and the listing reflects no more than the order their names came out of the hat.

They are:

Dannny Lambert
Tristan Miller
Janet Carter
Bill Martin
Adam Buick
Simon Wigley
Frederick Allen
Patricia Deutz

You can come hear that case at the following meetings:

Sunday 17 May, 6pm
YOUR CHANCE TO VOTE FOR WORLD SOCIALISM
Speakers: Danny Lambert, Tristan Miller
Socialist Party Head Office, 52 Clapham High St, London SW4 (nearest tube: Clapham North).

And:

Every Sunday between now and election time Hyde Park Speakers' Corner, Danny Lambert, Bill Martin & Adam Buick will be speaking from around 10 in the morning till mid afternoon.

Good News

We may get a free run of the use of the word "socialist" on the ballot paper in these elections. It seems that a number of those who falsely claim to be socialists will be backing the No2eu party led by Bob Crow, the General Secretary of the RMT union. This includes Militant who have attempted to hi-jack our name, but also the so-called Communist Party of Britain (who bring out the Mourning Star) which has a particularly despicable role in dragging the name of socialism through the mud by associating it with the state-capitalist dictatorship that used to exist in Russia under Stalin and his successors. It has been reported that the Respect George Galloway Party is considering joining this "narrow nationalist", anti-EU list. The SWP doesn't seem to be interested either in this list or in the elections.

On the other hand, it seems that the Scargill Labour Party might be standing a one-man list.

Good, if all the pseudo-socialist reformists get together that will make the issue in this election -- capitalism or socialism -- even clearer.

It’s election time again

Well, we're back again, the go ahead has been given, we're standing a list of candidates in the European Election in June. We'll announce the list shortly, but first, our election address is below:

It’s election time again
Every few years groups of professional politicians compete for your vote to win themselves a comfortable position, this time in the European Parliament. All of the other parties and candidates offer only minor changes to the present system. That is why whichever candidate or party wins there is no significant change to the way things are. Promises are made and broken, targets are set and not reached, statistics are selected and spun.

All politicians assume that capitalism is the only game in town, although they may criticise features of its unacceptable face, such as greedy bankers, or the worst of its excesses, such as unwinnable wars. They defend a society in which we, the majority of the population, must sell our capacity to work to the tiny handful who own most of the wealth. They defend a society in which jobs are offered only if there is a profit to be made.

Real socialism
The Socialist Party urges a truly democratic society in which people take all the decisions that affect them. This means a society without rich and poor, without owners and workers, without governments and governed, a society without leaders and led.

In such a society people would cooperate to use all the world’s natural and industrial resources in their own interests. They would free production from the artificial restraint of profit and establish a system of society in which each person has free access to the benefits of civilisation. Socialist society would consequently mean the end of buying, selling and exchange, an end to borders and frontiers, an end to organised violence and coercion, waste, want and war.

What you can do
You can vote for candidates who will work within the capitalist system and help keep it going. Or you can use your vote to show you want to overturn it and end the problems it causes once and for all.

When enough of us join together, determined to end inequality and deprivation, we can transform elections into a means of doing away with a society of minority rule in favour of a society of real democracy and social equality.

If you agree with the idea of a society of common and democratic ownership where no one is left behind and things are produced because they are needed, and not to make a profit for some capitalist corporation, and are prepared to join with us to achieve this then vote for the SOCIALIST PARTY list.

Object:
The establishment of a system of society based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of the whole community.

More details

I don't know if anyone is still reading this so long after the election but the London Elects site has just published a breakdown of the votes for the three elections (mayor, list members, constituency members) at http://results.londonelects.org.uk/results/xls/
This is an excel file that is not that easy to follow unless you know what you're looking for (we're candidate No 4 for Lambeth and Southwark). Anyway, here for the record, and in more readable form, are the highlights from Lambeth and Southwark constituency election.

LAMBETH
Labour 30625
LibDems 17921
Tory 17319
Greens 9759
Christian 2114
UKIP 1153
LeftList 1081
SOC 917 (1.1%)
Animals 899
EngDems 698

SOUTHWARK
Labour 29976
LibDems 19032
Tory 15516
Greens 8252
Christian 2318
UKIP 1859
EngDems 1169
Animals 929
LeftList 875
SOC 671 (0.8%)

Clearly, we're more popular in Lambeth than Southwark (while Animals and English Nationalists are more popular in Southwark). Which makes sense since we've been contesting parliamentary and local elections there for years and most of our election leaflets were distributed there.

Our prize result was in the Larkhall ward in Lambeth, roughly the area between Clapham North and Stockwell tube stations (postal votes not included):

Labour 1287
Tory 652
LibDems 390
Greens 370
Christian 98;
SOC 71 (2.3%)
LeftList 50
Animals 45
UKIP 36
EngDems 25

To be complete our best result in Southwark was in Faraday ward. Don't know why. Don't even know where it is without checking:

Labour 1333
LibDem 459
Tory 355
Green 196
Christian 128
UKIP 73
EngDems 59
SOC 39 (1.4%)
LeftList 37
Animals 22

Just checked. It's part of Walworth. Maybe it reflects the outdoor speaking station we ran at East Street from the 1930s to the 1960s.

Our worst result was in Surrey Docks ward of Southwark, now inhabited by yuppies, where we only got 18 votes. But at least we got more than double the number who voted for the LeftList (aka SWP), whose 8 votes was the lowest number cast for any candidate in any ward.

A day at the count

On Friday Bill and me spent nearly 12 hours at the count, from 11 in the morning till half-ten at night when the result for our constituency was announced (though I must admit to slinking off for a couple of hours in the afternoon). We could have stayed longer to hear Boris announced as mayor and the BNP announced as having an Assembly member.

The count took place at Olympia, not just for Lambeth and Southwark but for 5 other constituencies in the western part of London. Other counts were taking place in Alexandra Palace and the Millenium Dome (which we are now supposed to call the O2 dome after the mobile phone company). The mayor and party list votes were counted by constituency and then transmitted to city hall for collation (the old county hall is now an aquarium). So we saw these too.

As the count was to be done electronically we were met not by the traditional rows of counters seated at tables but by rows of people seated before computers and scanners into which they fed the ballot papers. This was supposed to be faster. May it was, but it wasn't fast enough for the media (too bad) as no results were ready for Newsnight let alone the 6 o'clock or the 10 o'clock news.

One fascinating side effect of this was that spoilt or unclear ballot papers were projected onto a large screen which anybody present could see. Previously, such papers were only seen by the election agents going into a huddle. So we spent much of the day sitting or standing in front of these screens (not just for Lambeth and Southwark and not just for the constituency election but also for the mayor and the party lists) looking at these papers as they came up, as did everybody else. In other words, these papers assumed more importance than the valid ones. Though there were other screens showing, as a bar chart, how each party was doing in each constituency (the equivalent of the old piles of ballot papers as a clue to who was in front).

Most of the papers were rejected because the voter had voted for more than one candidate. Some of these combinations were bizarre. People voting for both Boris and Ken or for the BNP and the Left List, but others were more logical, eg voting for the Greens and Labour or for the Liberals and Labour or for the Tory and the Liberal (there seemed to be quite a lot of these last ones, indicating what was going to happen, ie that more of the Liberal's second preference votes for the mayor were going to go to Boris).

Others deliberately spoilt their papers by writing "None of the above" (sometimes at the top of the paper) or "None of these represent me" or "Nobody" or "Void" or "spoilt paper" or "Bollocks, Crap to the lot of them". Others wrote in the name of some party not standing (as we do). We noticed a few for the BNP and one for the SLP (presumably the Scargill Labour Party not the DeLeonists , but you never know) and one for Anarchism. There was one paper in our constituency marked "SOCIALISM - SPGB" (perhaps some out of touch supporter, but perhaps a disgruntled ex-member). One person cast a write-in vote for Mugabe and others for various popstars and DJs and, I nearly forgot, for Jesus and Jehovah (not sure if these are the same person). There were quite a few blank papers.

All these must be regarded as deliberate abstentions but this is not the way non-valid papers are recorded. They are simply divided into "rejected votes" and "blank votes". It has to be admitted that most votes were rejected for voting for more than one candidate, which may well have been intentional but against the rules. Overall, there were 2,406,289 valid votes, plus 47,799 (2%) rejected votes and 39,894 blank papers(1.7%). In Lambeth and Southwark the figures were 163,762, 2583 (1.6%) and 1919 (1.2%).

In our constituency there was the scandal (recorded here in a previous blog) of the polling clerks in one polling station writing the elector's number on the ballot paper. What idiots. There were some 130 of these but, on legal advice, they were all ruled invalid on the grounds that this allowed the voter to be identified (again, against the rules). This, even though the vote was otherwise clear enough. This deprived us of at least 3 votes. 3 out of 130 is quite a lot (for us) but we know which ward was involved (Larkhall, turn right out of Clapham North tube station instead of left for Head Office). Maybe this has identified a ward to contest at the next borough elections. In fact, we are going to get a breakdown of votes per ward. Which will help us see if we got more votes in the wards we leafletted compared with the wards we didn't.

The fact that, with electronic counting, spoilt papers are now seen by many more people suggests that we should take our policy of writing "WORLD SOCIALISM - SPGB" across our ballot papers more seriously (looking at the rejected votes in the London South West constituency suggests that the 10 or so members living there didn't do this, but simply abstained). Even 10 of these in one constituency would be noticed and commented on.

Everybody was there, including the BNP (East End taxi drivers and barrow boys in suits) and the Christian Party (an African in robes). When there was a disputed BNP vote, the UKIP counting agents were in favour of accepting it, all the others were against. (We weren't involved as there was no BNP candidate standing in Lambeth and Southwark). I have to confess to talking civilly to a BNP agent and to making a gaffe when another African in robes asked for the result of the vote for his party in Lambeth and Southwark. I gave him the result of the Christian Party. It turned out he was the Left List candidate in the London West constituency (since the split with Galloway the SWP has turned to blacks rather than Muslims as their targeted minority but with hardly any success).

Galloway retained a following from Muslims in East London but everywhere else was beaten by the Christian party. Logical enough, I suppose, since it you are going to try to split the working class on religious lines there are more Christians than Muslims in this part of the world. In fact Galloway was also beaten by those who wanted to abolish the congestion charge. It's hard to think of an ambitious politician like him sticking for long with the electoral failure Respect is turning out to be for him.

Will Boris as mayor make any difference? Well, Ken's cronies will be kicked out of city hall . . . to be replaced by Boris's (under the US-style spoils system). Gas-guzzlers (or large family cars as Boris calls them) will not be charged extra for entering the congestion charge zone. It's doubtful that bendy buses will, as promised, be replaced by a new-style Routemaster with a conductor. After all, who's going to pay, and it is difficult to see the Tories imposing more costs on the bus companies. Otherwise life will continue as before.

The next elections will be those for the European Parliament in June next year where the constituencies are even bigger and when the count could last even longer. Anybody want to be the Party's Election Agent?

The list votes

Found the party list vote in the constituency:

The Labour Party 58554
Conservative Party 33466
Liberal Democrats 28071
Green Party 20711
British National Party 4945
The Christian Choice 4823
Abolish the Congestion Charge 4603
Respect (George Galloway) 2910
Left List 1846
UK Independence Party 1757
English Democrats 1255
Unity for Peace & Socialism 499
One London (Leader Damian Hockney) 254
Independent 68

Technical and Turnout for Lambeth and Southwark
Good votes 163762
Rejected votes 2583
Blank votes 1919
Total votes 166345

The term "good votes" is taken from the official "London elects" site and wouldn't be mine. I think they mean "valid votes".

More figures from Lambeth and Southwark

Here's how the electors of Lambeth and Southwark voted in the mayor election:

Livingstone LAB 80,172 48.92
Johnson CON 47,754 29.14
Paddick LD 20,530 12.53
Berry GRN 7,190 4.39
Craig CPA 2,838 1.73
Barnbrook BNP 2,448 1.49
German LL 1,199 0.73
Batten UKIP 848 0.52
O'Connor END 506 0.31
McKenzie IND 392 0.24

Figures for the party list votes were posted last night on a screen at Olympia where the count took place but I've not been able to find them anywhere else. All I noted were the percentages of the some of the lists and the votes given to Respect George Galloway and the Left List:

BNP 3.02%
Christian 2.91
Abolish Congestion Charge 2.81
Respect 1.78 (2910 votes)
Left List 1.13 (1846 votes)
"Peace and Socialism" (Old CP) 0.30 (499 votes)

Also perhaps relevant is that the Militant Tendency candidate in nextdoor Greenwich and Lewisham got 1587 votes.

Late, late result

Here's the result, declared an hour or so ago, at least 4 hours later than expected:

Labour 60 601
Liberal 36 953
Con 32 835
Green 18 011
Christian 4432
UKIP 3012
LeftList 1956
EngDems 1867
Animals 1828
Socialist 1588

Anecdotes and analysis follow tomorrow morning

Not what we meant

Certainly not in Lambeth: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7377724.stm

A May Day greeting

It's a bit embarrassing really. After all the slagging off of Militant and their candidate next door in Greenwich and Lewisham (mind you, their man on Urban75 had a good go at us), we've had the following email from the Militant candidate there under the title "All the best of luck to Danny Lambert" :

"Hi Danny
Got a flyer through my door re your standing in Lambeth and Southwark
So just to say all the best
Hope you get a good turn out
Have a good Mayday weekend too
Your in solidarity
Cllr Chris Flood
Socialist Party (E&W)
Lewisham Council
GLA Socialist Alternative Candidate, Lewisham and Greenwich"

He seems a decent enough bloke but, as there are serious political differences between our two parties, we can't return the greetings, at least not the part wishing us a good turn out. But we can wish him and all other fellow workers a happy international workers day.

A not so secret ballot

Well, it happened, ten past seven this morning - I know, I lknow, I slept in a little coz I'm on holiday - I went and cast my ballot for world socialism. My polling station had moved from the primary school to the church run nursery across the road.

I was greeted by a chart asking "How tall are you" and the good news is that I am considerably taller than all those five year olds.

Actually, I wrote "World Socialism (SPGB)" on all three of my ballot papers in large friednly letter, and put them nicely, unfolded, into the box. I chose to add the little rider for two reasons:

Because I've heard canny agents have occasionally blagged World Socialism for Labour or leftist candidates, and I wanted to make sure.

Because at the count spoilt ballots are displayed on a screen, and I wanted to advertise.

The polling staff must have guessed I was up to something, because I was in that booth scribbling for ages.

I didn't, as some members have in the past, poke my head out and ask how you spell "Bastards", I just quietly got on with business and then went about my day, another of my small lifetime ration of votes used up, and still unable to vote positively for the party of my choice.

Only Labour had a polling agent outside, I cheerfully let him know my polling card number - half the point of the write-in vote is to positively let it be known that we've been to cast a vote, a good discrepency between tallied voters and valid votes cast sends a significant message.

Good luck, fellow socialists.

The last leaflet

The last of the nearly 20,000 leaflets distributed in the constituency was put through a letter box in Woodsmansterne Road, SW16 this afternoon. This is a long road at the southernmost point of the constituency. It's actually in Streatham (part of Lambeth), but continue too far along it and you end up in Croydon, take a wrong turning and you end up in Merton (one Labour canvasser had done the opposite as we saw a Labour leaflet supporting their candidate in Merton).

This is a reminder that "Lambeth and Southwark" includes areas which are not traditionally associated with these two historic places. Another is a letter we received from a Miss Wright of Pymers Mead, West Dulwich, SE21. She wrote:

"Dear Sir/Madam,
I am returning the leaflet you put through my letterbox as I don't you putting anymore of your leaflets through my letterbox again".

We don't know if she wrote similar letters to the other parties about the leaflets they put through her letterbox, but they seem a polite lot down in Dulwich (she actually put a stamp on the letter, if she'd read the leaflet properly she could have sent it to our freepost address and saved herself 27p). Normally, people who don't like our leaflets tear them up in front of us and tell us they're voting for the BNP.

But the most common reaction we got on the doorsteps was "it doesn't make any difference anyway who gets in". Which corresponds with our analysis and shows that workers are not stupid: a lot of them do realise what's going on. Only they don't think they can do anything about it, so they just abstain and don't bother to vote at sll. It is highly likely that, tomorrow, the abstainers will be the absolute majority.

So, why if it makes no difference who gets in, were we standing? First, to use a period of heightened interest in politics to put across our case for a society of common ownership, democratic control, production for use, and distribution on the basis of "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs". And, second, because if workers use their votes intelligently in their own interest they could change things, they could use the vote to help get rid of the profit system and bring in socialism.

It's voting for leaders to try to run the profit system in the interests of the majority that makes no difference, not voting in itself. That's why, where there's no socialist candidate, instead of abstaining we go to the polling station and vote, even if it's only a write-in vote. A way of keeping a potential weapon sharpened for the time when a majority are ready to use it in their own interest. Where there is a socialist candidate standing, we vote for them.

And there is a socialist candidate in Lambeth and Southwark.

The last day

Yep. Today is the last day. After today, there are no more. Tomorrow is the apocalypse. Or is that election? I've tramped up so many stairs,. spiralled down so many 20-storey tower blocks, caught my fingers so many times in letter boxes, been so cold and wet that I quite forget the difference between the two. Tomorrow I may rest.

But, not until after I've been down to the polling station to cast my write-in vote for World Socialism (SPGB)! And you, faithful reader, especially if you live in Lambeth and Southwark where you can actually cast a ballot for the Socialist Party's candidate Danny Lambert.

Remember, we are the party that makes no promises - it's you that makes the promise when you cast your vote to say "I am a socialist, I will work for common and democratic ownership and control of the wealth of the world between me and my fellow workers."

Lets see, come Friday, just how many promises we can collect, eh?

More Unions

Last night I gopt a leaflet through the mail from my union - Unison - urging me to vote Labour. Unison is a registered third party, and so it can spend money on election campaigns that, unless I'm mistaken, don't count towards a candidate's campaign costs.

Given they have the names and addresses of about 150,000 (they claim) electors, this is a highly effective campaigning tool for the institutionalised labour party.

They are quite right that Labour has achieved many goals, and espouses many values consonant with those of the trade union. But, then, the trade union's demands and values are about a defence of market interests for workers within capitalism - seeing, particularly, its own interest wrapt up in the old conditions of public sector bargaining from nationalised and municipalised industries.

Of course, we could batter on at the union that the real interest of their members is socialism - but until the members of the union are socialists and are able to use their weight to move the lethargic democratic machinery of the union that just won't happen.

So, that makes it all the more important that trade unionists make this clear by voting for the socialist party, either by voting for Danny Lambert if they can, or joining the write-in if they're outside Lambeth & Southwark. And more than that, we need you to join the Socialist Party and stand up in your workplaces and unions to be counted.

A little try at my branch recently failed, we sent a motion to conference affirming that Unison has no leaders, and asking the NEC to make that clear, the standing orders ruled it out of order, because they can, but I'll keep on about it, and if thousands of socialists in the union started to camnpaign for that instead of saving the pittance and stopping the thing, we'd start to see real movement, and a real movement.