Preston Farce – Frequently Asked Questions

Is Faircloth really a right winger?

Here are the facts:

He appeared on the ‘AEEU united’ slate that stood against the Gazette in 1998

He then got elected onto the Executive and voted solidly with Sir Ken Jackson’s Right wing, against the Gazette.

Jackson then offered him a full time job in the AEEU union which he accepted, leaving the lay Executive. This raises 2 separate questions 1) Would Jackson offer him the job if he didn’t trust him? 2) Why would Faircloth accept knowing at first hand how Jackson ran the union.

He has never been to a Gazette meeting in his life until 19^th October 2008, when he asked to get nominated.

Faircloth says he doesn’t know how he got on the AEEU united slate. Billy Spiers, now a left winger was also on the slate.

We’re assured by people who knew that you absolutely didn’t get on Jacksons slate if you weren’t a Jackson supporter. Billy Speirs was on the slate and to his credit, once he was on the Executive and saw how Jackson ran the union, he openly switched to voting with the Left, unlike Faircloth. You also have to looks at Faircloth’s explanation of how he came to be on the slate: It is very weak and curt – “I have no idea”.

Faircloth may have seen the error of his ways and switched to the Left.

Faircloth has never been to a Gazette meeting in his life until 19^th October 2008, when he asked to get nominated.

Faircloth was quietly assisting the Left as best he could at the time of Jackson.

This was the line given by Faircloth’s supporter Syd Packer at Preston. We can find no evidence for it and no details of how he helped. Ex Gazette chair Jimmy Warne, who should know, denies it completely.

Faircloth is a nice bloke and has been a good regional secretary to the NW

That may well be the case. It doesn’t mean he is General Secretary material and his performance at Preston didn’t impress anyone present. Plus having made a mistake with one General Secretary (who had no Right wing background) why on earth would you then go for one who actually has a background on the Right?

Surely the NW Gazette leadership didn't know of Faircloths Right wing background when they promoted him?

Well Faircloth didn't spell it out, judging by how he glossed over it at the national meeting on Saturday. His answer when asked why he appeared on the AEEU United Slate was 'I have no idea'. He didn't mention, explain or apologise for taking Jackson’s shilling or for his solid pro-Jackson record on the union’s Executive. In any case we know for a fact that NW Chair Neil Sheehan was told about Faircloth’s AEEU united background as early as the 11th October 2008.

Jerry Hicks never attends Gazette meetings either.

He has been to National Gazette meetings, though not many. In his region (SW) there is no functioning Gazette organisation (correction - a clique make decisions but they don't have any meetings to assist them). Laurence Faircloth has never been to a Gazette meeting in his life until his nomination.

Wasn't the decision at Saturdays national Gazette meeting fairly conducted and shouldn’t we abide by it?

The Chair Neil Sheehan was asked at the beginning of the meeting to remove the mandate from NW members present and allow them a free vote. He refused. NW members have been expelled (‘excluded’) in the past for breaking mandate. Because the meeting was in the NWs home area, as usual they outnumbered any other region so the decision had effectively already been made. How can you ask people to be bound by a decision they are meant to be taking when you know full well the outcome has already been decided? You can see that the decision was already made by reading the NW's announcement of 19th October. As for maintaining solidarity in the Gazette, that is long gone - Sheehan and Pat Coyne (no relation to Kevin) have already split with the other Gazette members on the union’s Executive over the vital issue of having the rule change and election in the first place.

Other candidates were invited to Preston to put their case, why didn’t they?

Because of the rigorous enforcement of the ‘undertaking’ not to stand at all if not selected by the Gazette, combined with Faircloth having already been selected (see above), it meant that any candidate except Faircloth who came would automatically be ending their campaign. For Simpson it would have meant effectively resigning as General Secretary. If the Gazette ever was powerful enough or democratic enough or honest enough to justify demanding this ‘undertaking’ from candidates, it certainly isn’t now.

Back to www.dearunite.com .