This was the third annual motion based TUC Conference for lesbian, gay and bisexual trade unionists, held in London at Congress House. There were about 200 delegates from 36 different Unions, and about 80 visitors, mainly ordinary trade unionists .Most delegations were made up of grass-roots LGB trade union activists with a smattering of bureaucrats. Many were based on LGB groups in particular unions, but all were formal delegations, either elected or appointed.
The important issues discussed included section 28, homophobia in schools, legislative campaigns for lesbian & gay rights, discrimination in the workplace, lesbian & gay family rights (the subject also of the workshop session), the ‘bargaining agenda’ for LGB workers (pensions, benefits, family friendly etc), and last but not least reform of the Equality structure of the TUC itself. Speakers included Hilary Armstrong, and a couple of lawyer types.
The Section 28 debate began the Conference on Thursday morning. During the debate several speakers questioned the compromises done by both the Government and Stonewall to get Section 28 repealed, both in Scotland and in the Learning & Skills Bill in Westminster. It was felt we could and have ended up with worst legislation. Hilary Armstrong was present during the debate. She justified the compromise on sex education in her speech and was received critically but politely. Then there was futher debate on motions from the teaching unions which highlighted how stupid the compromised approach was on the ground. Delegates also pointed out the loss of political initiative on progressive change that resulted from running scared of the Daily Mail, and the parallel of the scapegoating of asylum-seekers.
There was an obligatory bust-up on the Thursday afternoon over the remit of the Conference. MSF wanted the Conference to include the issues of transgendered people’s rights. However the majority opinion was that, though transgendered people who were LGB were welcome at the Conference, our main issue was sexuality and the specific issues around transgendered people properly belonged in another forum. Prevoiusly, at the first LGTUC, the vote was won to include bisexual people in the remit of the Conference. Two years later we are still waiting for the powers that be at the TUC to change the title of the Conference accordingly. This year, as last, we refered back the Conference report section that included the information that the General Council would not change the title yet.
Another Section that was referred back was the request to the General Council, arising from an Emergency motion to last years Conference, that the TUC organise a demonstration against racism and homophobia in the light of the bombings in Soho and Brixton. Delegates felt an opportunity was missed for the TUC to take a lead on these issues.
The last debate on Friday afternoon was on the internal structure of the TUC. Because last year all the Equalities Conferences of the TUC (LGTUC, Women’s TUC, Black Workers’ TUC) called for the right to send two motions to the main Congress, and then a motion at Congress was very nearly carried with the same demand, there is currently a review of TUC Structure. Progressive forces want a policy input from the increasingly successful equalities Conferences to Congress. However, others believe this would attack the principle of affiliates being the only bodies that can put motions to Congress (control, control!). Some are worried that if this is allowed then Trades Councils will demand the same, and also that it would lead to futher demands for represention of LGB and disabled trade unionists on the General Council as well as the current reserved seats for women and black representatives. It all sounds good to me! The key thing is to cross the rubicon of affiliates “autonomy”. And the policy input of motions is the most popular way. At this years LGTUC it was decided to re-call for a policy input to Congress of two motions again, to call for the Chair of the L&TUC Committee to be elected not appointed by the General Council, and to have a seat on that body, and for the LGTUC Conference itself to elect any LGB representatives on the General Council.
The TUC is taking forward a LGTUC-inspired campaign for Anti-Discrimination Legislation on the grounds of sexuality, started last year. They have produced a good report called “Straight Up: the case for legislation” and have produced thousands of postcards, in time for Pride, for people to send to their MPs. (There was a TUC Marquee at Pride with stalls fom several unions. Also the TUC organised the employment rights section of the Pride March this year.) Four unions have amendments into next week’s National Policy Forum of the Labour Party calling for Anti-Discrimination Legislation covering all civil rights (not just employment) for LGBs to be introduced in the course of the next Parliament. This has been resisted so far. This issue will run up to Labour Party Conference unless concessions are made before.
There were several fringe meetings at the LGTUC this year. The only ‘political’ one was a debate organised by the Labour Campaign for Lesbian & Gay Rights on whether Labour is deleivering on our rights (answer = NO) and what we should do about it. Chris Morris, who produces the magazine Outcast, was the guest speaker. The meeting agreed that Labour was not delivering, but also identified weaknesses in the current LGB movement. Stonewall is perceived as undemocratic, and willing to settle for tolerance rather than equality, and in the case of Section 28, for replacement rather than repeal. The need for a ‘Congress’ of LGB grass-roots groups found agreement. Our problem is making it happen so we can have a credible voice in the LGB movement and campaign for the concerns of working class LGBs.
