Why would Jerry Hicks' achieving the necessary number of
nominations to get him onto the ballot paper shock anyone? Jerry is a seasoned
election campaigner, in my estimation he has been electioneering now for around
6-years (almost non-stop). Jerry's quest for the 'big job' in first Amicus and
now Unite has the quality of The Man Who Would Be King about it.
However, when we strip back the David and Goliath analogy
things aren't quite so one-sided as Jerry would have us believe.
In the first instance, Jerry has one resource none of his
previous, or present, opponents had, that is all the time in the world to
commit to electioneering.
Hicks has also got the entire membership of the SWP and
their funding on which to fall back - as well as donations from branches (one
gave him £1000). Again, a not inconsiderable resource.
McCluskey on the other hand has a union to head up. Sure, he
attends meetings, but these are carried out in his own time; unlike Hicks who
can call and attend meetings any time of the day.
"I issue a challenge to Len McCluskey to set up
regional hustings so that Unite members could here what the two candidates had
to offer."
Why Jerry? So you can do another runner? Remember September
2010 in Manchester when you lost your bottle and ran away from those hustings.
I do; and so do hundreds of others.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Tags