Solidarity: an update. Theft is theft, even when it's intellectual property theft.

The appalling story of the BNP's disastrous move into the trades union movement continues with the September bulletin from the original union started by the BNP (which we shall refer to as Solidarity 1) having a go at 'untrustworthy' Nick Griffin and the union's Certification Officer.

In response to a question referring to the extremely confusing double-union situation that asks what the future holds for Solidarity, Vice-President Tim Hawkes responds thus:

'Which one? As far as the EC [Executive Committee] of Solidarity is concerned, the idea of a union run and controlled by the BNP leadership (and Third Way sidekicks) is a joke. The Union must be focused on worker issues not political point scoring. It is clear that the support structure of Solidarity with regards to promotion and recruitment has been seriously harmed and our association with Nick Griffin – who publicly and privately declared to me that he view (sic) Solidarity as ‘independent’ – who I now consider to be highly untrustworthy, has harmed us considerably. Well, with regards to the BNP-Solidarity version, we understand that it is fundamentally just a political union and by its actions have rejected any true sense of independence and therefore it is unlikely to go anywhere other than as a smoke screen in loosely supporting working class concerns. However, I for one would not be prepared to willingly betray the British workers by allowing the BNP leadership to dictate the actions of Solidarity. It is one of the prime reasons that I have continued my work with the Union. The future of Solidarity is in question, and in truth I would personally consider a dead union to be better than a corrupt thieving union, after all there are plenty of TUC unions who fill that role. My greatest concern is that BNP-Solidarity will succeed due to the Certification Office unwillingness to do their job, and the EC’s lack of legal resources means that genuine non-political people will join up with the BNP version, not knowing that it simply funds a lifestyle for individuals of questionable moral integrity who have no concerns for the workers of this country and frequently don’t even work themselves. At this stage we should just wait to see if the Certification Office do anything, and apply pressure where we can.'

Hawke is being disingenuous. Solidarity 1 was started by and for the BNP and was, from its birth, run and controlled by the BNP leadership and its Third Way sidekicks. Though the party and the detestable Patrick Harrington (former General Secretary of Solidarity 1, currently General Secretary of Solidarity 2 and long-time pal of BNP leader Nick Griffin) attempted to deny the BNP front-group status of Solidarity (and continually edit Wikipedia entries to that effect) the actions taken by the party immediately following the suspension of Harrington from Solidarity 1 made it perfectly obvious that Griffin always intended to control the union completely and wasn't about to let that control pass into the hands of others who may not have his best interests at heart.

Hawke's ludicrous statement that 'we understand that [Solidarity 2] is fundamentally just a political union' displays either a convenient disregard of Solidarity's entire very short history or a truly incredible naivety that makes one wonder whether he should just give up politics now before he does himself a mischief, though he almost redeems himself with his criticism of the Certification Office, which seems to have ignored the turmoil completely, and his comment 'that genuine non-political people will join up with the BNP version, not knowing that it simply funds a lifestyle for individuals of questionable moral integrity', presumably a reference to Harrington and/or Griffin.

Solidarity 1 has, let's face it, had it. It's time for Hawke and co to bite the bullet and accept that Griffin and Harrington have, despite acting in a manner that almost everyone with a conscience would consider both immoral and illegal (the theft of the union funds, the website and the account details immediately following Harrington's suspension), outflanked the original union leadership and appear to be getting away with it. If it's any consolation, our estimate is that the union will collapse within a year or two anyway, through lack of interest. Nobody would want to be a part of an unrecognised union with no negotiating power and in any case, once Nick Griffin sees that it isn't a money-spinner, he'll lose interest and stop supporting it.

Hawke is right about one thing though and that is that the Certification Office should have jumped on this right from the start. Both versions of Solidarity should have been suspended until a proper investigation (including a police investigation) had taken place.

The story (thus far) can be followed via the links below:

BNP's fake union Solidarity already up against the ropes
BNP's Solidarity situation worsens - fake union under threat
Solidarity - an email update from the Vice-President Tim Hawke
BNP discards democracy completely to force takeover of 'independent' Solidarity
Solidarity disaster goes critical as criminal investigation is threatened
Where next for the BNP’s amoeba-like Solidarity union?
Solidarity update - BNP’s Nick Griffin heavily criticised for interference
Solidarity - police called in

One interesting though relatively trivial spin-off from all this is that Solidarity 2 has applied to have the logo (top) registered as a trade mark, with all the intellectual property rights that this would give them. However, as many of our correspondents have pointed out, the design of the Solidarity logo (and indeed, the name itself) is a blatant rip-off of the logo (above) of the real Solidarity union which itself owns the copyright on the original image. Objections to the fake union stealing the logo and name of the original and far more worthy Solidarity can be made via email to the Intellectual Property Office here: law.section@ipo.gov.uk

Solidarity - police called in

News has reached us that the Executive Committee of the BNP’s fake Solidarity trade union has called in the police to investigate the affairs of the strife-torn organisation. EC members Clive Potter and Tim Hawke have also involved the trade union Certification Officer and sought the help of Leicester MP Peter Soulsby. This confirms comments made on the Nazi Stormfront forum.

This comes in the same week that Solidarity’s 2006 annual return became available, showing that at the beginning of 2007 the union had only 42 members. In May Vice-President Tim Hawke emailed one of our correspondents claiming that the union had around 100 members.

We don’t intend to repeat the entire Solidarity saga here (links to the relevant LUAF articles are provided below), save to reiterate that the farce began at a quorate meeting of Solidarity’s Executive Committee, where allegations of irregular behaviour regarding the union’s funds were put to General Secretary Patrick Harrington, and which at a later Special Executive Meeting resulted in his suspension pending an investigation.

Harrington, an old friend of BNP leader Nick Griffin, refused to accept his suspension and sought Griffin’s support. This seems to have caught the BNP leadership off-balance, as the “rescue plan” they put into operation was badly thought out - completely disregarding Solidarity’s legally agreed constitution - and enacted with typical BNP heavy-handedness.

Any pretence that Solidarity was ever anything other than yet another BNP front was shattered when the union’s host provider, owned by failed South African school-bomber and BNP member Lambertus Nieuwhof, hijacked its website which remains in the control of Harrington’s version of Solidarity. An unconsitutional EGM was quickly called, it being agreed beforehand to expand the number of Executive Committee posts and to carve them up between the BNP and Third Way (the tiny organisation represented by Harrington), which the non-EGM duly ratified.

The BNP’s internal affairs may be conducted in this hole and corner manner, but the affairs of what is a legally constituted trade union are quite a different matter.

Any unbiased perusal of Solidarity’s constitution will show that the Special Executive Meeting which suspended Patrick Harrington was a legal gathering within the scope of that constitution. Whether Harrington was guilty or not of the charges made against him has no bearing on that inescapable fact.

Consequently, we believe that the actions of Harrington and his supporters since that time have been entirely beyond Solidarity’s constitution, that his and the BNP’s version of the union has no real legal existence, and, therefore, no right to utilise the official union’s financial and other resources, including its membership lists - hence the involvement of the police.

Solidarity update - BNP’s Nick Griffin heavily criticised for interference
Where next for the BNP’s amoeba-like Solidarity union?
Solidarity disaster goes critical as criminal investigation is threatened
BNP discards democracy completely to force takeover of 'independent' Solidarity
Solidarity - an email update from the Vice-President Tim Hawke
BNP's Solidarity situation worsens - fake union under threat
BNP's fake union Solidarity already up against the ropes
Related articles

Solidarity update - BNP's Nick Griffin heavily criticised for interference

Much information has been received by Lancaster UAF over the past week, the bulk of it concerning the Solidarity disaster, its unconstitutional and possibly illegal Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) and the bizarre and very probably fraudulent election that led to putting Patrick Harrington and the BNP firmly in control of the breakaway Solidarity - the one we'll refer to as Solidarity B.

First things first. If you've not been following the Solidarity fiasco, you're going to be easily confused, in which case you should check out some of our previous posts from June 22nd, June 25th, June 26th, July 5th, July 11th and July 17th.

It has been announced (and repeated ad nauseum) that the support for an EGM was overwhelming, with an excess of the two-thirds membership requirement voting in favour. We've now received five emails from members who have all reported that they never received a ballot paper at all, clearly indicating that there are one or two porkies being told. Based on past experience, we would suggest that the Griffin/Harrington camp are the liars.

The postal ballot itself was described as a 'nonsense', a 'farce' and a 'sham ballot' by a poster on the Stormfront nazi forum who said;

'The "voting paper" that i received was a nonsense. there was no number to the slip and no way of proving who was sending in the slip, and who would count them and how. It was a farce reminiscent of a Zimbabwean election...'

Indeed it was. There was no independent officer to oversee the process, nobody except Griffin and Harrington to send out the ballots, no tellers to count the votes, no indication of how many voted for, against or abstained, nor was there any proof that any ballot papers had been sent out at all.

All the information we have received indicates that the EGM was attended by just fifteen to twenty members - at least we assume they were all members - and a number of heavies, presumably to keep out the riff-raff like the rightful President and Vice-President of Solidarity, Clive Potter and Tim Hawke.

From this fifteen to twenty in attendance, seven were chosen to represent the Executive Committee and one, Graham Williamson, was clearly put in post as the union's public relations guru - despite the fact that he has no experience of public relations at all. More on Williamson here. Near as dammit half of those who attended then, went along in the sure and certain knowledge that they would be voted into a position of some authority - assuming we concede that the Solidarity B union has any authority at all, which we don't.

Whether you like them or loathe them, unions are rightly famed for one single thing - their strict adherence to the rules of the union, or the Constitution. The Constitution of any union is sacrosanct and no member or officer would consider breaking any part of it or bypassing it. A change in a union's Constitution will only be carried out (generally) at the Annual General Meeting.

Part of the problem with Solidarity B is that there is already a Solidarity union (Solidarity A) in place complete with a properly drawn-up and agreed Constitution. Harrington deciding, for whatever reason, that Solidarity A is not for him, and running off and forming Solidarity B, is, whatever way you care to look at it, entirely unconstitutional.

Disregarding all the convoluted facts and outright lies that have been told about the Solidarity split, the simple fact is that it was reported that Tim Hawke and Clive Potter had problems with Patrick Harrington's version of the accounts. It's worth remembering that that is what started the whole Solidarity fiasco off. Harrington then promptly denied the bona-fide President and Vice-President of Solidarity access to the Paypal account which holds the union's funds (in other words, the member's fees that were paid to the properly constituted Solidarity), and denied them access to the membership list and the union website.

With Nick Griffin's collaboration, he hastily presented his version of events and the wheels were put in motion for an entirely unconstitutional EGM. He also announced (again with the BNP's help) the establishment of three new Solidarity (B) websites, announcing repeatedly that they were the proper sites to visit. You'll note that Griffin and the BNP is prominent in this mess but only on Harrington's side. So much for the BNP's belief in fair play and (excuse my laughter) democratic values.

Just my opinion but all this has a distinct taste of cover-up and, rather more importantly, fraud.

Since Harrington's rapid departure from Solidarity A, the internet has been awash with lies and misinformation about Hawke and Potter. They did nothing to present the union as professional, they did nothing at all, they didn't want to see a membership campaign, they didn't want a stall at the BNP's Red, White and Blue event, that they were 'State-controlled', that they were part of a 'far-left' plot etc etc. Anything, in fact, to discredit them in the eyes of the membership - repeated by Harrington and the BNP in the clear hope that if it's repeated often enough, it'll be believed.

Though we're reluctant as a rule to credit anyone on the far-right with any decency at all, Potter and Hawke have generally maintained a dignified silence throughout this disaster, quietly working in the background maintaining their union and sticking to the Constitution rigorously. Having said that, we believe that Solidarity - both versions - should be barred from becoming a bona-fide trade union when they are patently not a trade union, simply a support group for so-called nationalists run by a combination of the NF, the ITP and the BNP - all of them arguably fascist groups.

Following, as far as we can see, the proper procedure, Potter and Hawke eventually expelled Harrington. The letter of expulson is enlightening and well worth a read;

'With reference to an Extraordinary Executive Meeting held on the 8th July 2007 I inform you that you have been instantly expelled from the Union due to gross, unacceptable behaviour in your refusal to accept your suspension dated 3rd of June 2007.

Your refusal to accept an investigation of your irregular behaviour regarding union funds, and still refusing to comply with the Official Union Executive in these concerns is no longer sustainable.

Also the other main reasons for expulsion from the union are as followed:

1. Hijacking the unions website and claiming you were illegally suspended from your office – which is false. In this matter you can refer to the Union Constitution on the following
Section 1 (b), Section 7 (a), Section 8 (a) (b), Section 12 (c) – specifically.
Section 12 (e) – specifically.
Section 14 (a) – specifically unless you appeal – no executive member is subject to the same rules as its members.
Section 15 (a) – your refusal to accept an investigation by the Executive through their nomination of a Special Auditor on this matter.
Section 19 (d) – your long-term refusal to submit the books to the Unions Head Office.

2. Bringing the Unions Governing Body and the Union into Gross Disrepute by working with the BNP leadership to undermine their independence and hijacking the unions website by their abuse of relationship of this union in this matter.

3. Manipulation of Account with regards to your apparent transfer of £700 from the main HSBC Solidarity Account to a Business account, many days after you were notified of your suspension.

4. Stating on Union Accounts that their was a loan to a member of £150 which is not true as the loan was given to the union, not the other way round.

You have gone to extreme lengths to circumscribe being investigated by this union, to such a degree that you issue publicly gross malicious and false lies, concerning the actions of this governing body in your suspension. You falsely claim that we are duped, by several Marxists, and we look forward to you naming such ghosts. These malicious and false lies will be in due course answered at an appropriate time.

This union’s Executive in the position of President and Vice-President take great umbrage to the false use of our Names in your illegal use of the unions website and request you stop this at once. In any serious professional union the processes of its governing body and its relationship with members, is clearly defined, in its constitution, which ours also reflects in this matter. You have totally disrupted and attempted to destroy this good order and discipline of the union in such matters and brought it into Gross Disrepute. On these grounds alone let alone other serious charges, no serious professional union could allow such a destructive personality, which you are, to exist within its body in any capacity. On this ground alone you are immediately expelled from this union on these charges.

Please note that you have SEVEN days from the date of receipt of this letter to appeal and present any claims that you believe is illegal in your expulsion on these grounds.'

Assuming points 3 and 4 to be correct, these seem to me (as a person with no formal legal training but with a reasonable sense of right and wrong) to be criminal in nature and one wonders whether this has yet been passed on to the police. Rumour has us believe that it has but, if not, we have to ask ourselves why not?

There are now two unions claiming the name Solidarity. There are people who will join one simply because they loathe the people involved in the other. Griffin, in yet another attempt to deflect any well-deserved humiliation at his unwarranted interference, will try to persuade the BNP membership to switch to the Harrington/BNP coalition Solidarity, then will claim the takeover as a huge success leaving many members less than happy. One Stormfront poster expressed his disatisfaction with Nick Griffin's unwanted interference thus;

'...no leader should be free of criticism and I must say that criticism here is well-deserved. He has made a very flawed judgement and a crucial error in regards to assisting the hi-jacking of this Solidarity Union. By allying himself with an old National Front comrade over his own members and destroying any concept of decency, truth, right and constitution then he has sadly behaved dishonorably and unlawfully. He has given his enemies, both on the Right and on the Left, the ammunition that they need. He is now a damaged man who has shown his weakness and ineptude and his failure of leadership. This is very sad for someone like myself who truly believed and followed Nick Griffin, who still admires his achievements and his talents, but has seen his followers betrayed.'

The Solidarity fiasco started off as something of a joke which has descended rapidly into a farce. Considering the union has only existed for roughly a year and a half, its short life has been plagued with chaos (as is relatively normal for anything involving the BNP) and the only sensible thing to do is to put it out of its misery. Consequently, we would like people to write to the Certifications Officer, asking for an investigation of the union(s) and the appalling mess in which it seems to have got itself. A decent investigation by an outside body might uncover a lot more than just interference from Nick Griffin and co. It wouldn't hurt to send a copy or separate letter/email to the TUC, the Trade and Industry Secretary (now the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform) and your local MP too. Addresses below. It's time to shut this rubbish down before ordinary people start getting sucked into it because someone tells them Solidarity is a great union. It isn't. It's crap and it needs to go.

David Taylor
Certification Office for Trade Unions and Employers' Associations
Brandon House, 180 Borough High Street, London SE1 1LW
Tel: 020 7210 3734
Fax: 020 7210 3612
CERT@certoffice.org

Trades Union Congress
Congress House
Great Russell Street
London
WC1B 3LS
Tel: 020 7636 4030
Fax: 020 7636 0632
No email? Shameful.

Rt Hon John Hutton MP
Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
22 Hartington Street, Barrow in Furness, Cumbria LA14 5SL
Telephone: 01229 431204
Fax: 01229 432016
huttonj@parliament.uk

You can find out who your local MP is and write to him/her here.

Where next for the BNP's amoeba-like Solidarity union?

Following the fraudulent Extraordinary General Meeting held by the breakaway Solidarity union on Sunday, there is speculation about what will happen to both it and the original Solidarity from which it split. Both organisations are claiming the name, both are carrying on business as usual and both are purporting to be the Solidarity. Confusion is rife. To avoid making it worse, we'll refer to them as Solidarity A and B, A being the original union and B being the one stolen by Nick Griffin and Pat Harrington.

In a typically BNP-style News Bulletin, Solidarity B printed this little gem on its website yesterday;

'Solidarity members have reclaimed their Union at an Emergency General Meeting. The meeting heard how all members of Solidarity had been notified of the meeting called constitutionally by 2/3rds of the membership. Notices were published on the Union website, text messages sent to mobiles and email and postal bulletins sent.'

So two-thirds of the membership called for the EGM, did they? We're assured by three correspondents (writing to us completely independently as far as we can tell) who are all in the union, that they were not contacted in any way at all, either by text, post or phone, and if they had been they would certainly have voted against the changes. One wonders how this two-thirds figure could be proven and whether the BNP actually bothered to get in touch with anyone it thought might possibly be in opposition to its great takeover plan.

One of our correspondents also asked exactly how many people attended the EGM - an interesting question which we would love to have answered. Perhaps Harrington (who has posted on here using the apt name 'doublethink') would like to post some details.

'Those who may have been frightened to attend had been offered personal guarantees of their safety and dedicated security to allay their fears.'

This is clearly BNP-inspired 'by implication' bullshit that ranks alongside the fake assassination attempt on Nick Griffin as entirely stupid and completely unnecessary. The BNP is always claiming threats and intimidation, though it's usually alleged that it's 'reds' that have carried them out. Who is it this time - Tim Hawke and Clive Potter?

Regardless of all this, Nick Griffin has, using a couple of other people, regained control of what he sees as his union. Yes, Griffin, not Harrington. In fact, Griffin's grubby, chubby mitts are all over this fiasco, as you can easily tell when you consider how Solidarity has been snatched from those who wanted it to be almost an ordinary union (even though it would be supportive of the far-right) and placed in the hands of those who simply wish to exploit it for their own ends.

Though starting off on the wrong foot with a sacked General Secretary, rumours of financial mismanagement at best and theft at worst, the very clear theft of the membership list, the Paypal account and the website, Solidarity B is patently going on to better things, with a completely illegal EGM and the unconstitutional election to the Executive of two people who were either not members at all or certainly hadn't been for three months, Lindsey Nieuwhof and Simone Clarke.

Lindsey, you may recall, is the wife of Lambertus Nieuwhof, the new(ish) BNP web guru and school-bombing terrorist who, at Harrington and Griffin's instigation, locked Potter and Hawke out of the Solidarity website. Simone Clarke is the ballet dancer everyone made such a fuss about a few months back - generally disliked in the BNP because her (ex?) partner and the father of her child is Cuban-Chinese and they just don't like that sort of thing.

All this, though a laugh for us opponents of the BNP and its allied idiots, is really beside the point. This whole fiasco was all caused when Potter and Hawke decided there was something dodgy in the accounts so rightly suspended Harrington pending an investigation. Since then a takeover has been engineered in collusion with the BNP through theft after theft - surely making the whole Solidarity B formation non-financial fraud on a fairly grand scale? If we were in the same unhappy position as Potter and Hawke, we would immediately begin seeking advice for a legal challenge to the ownership of Solidarity via the High Court.

Naturally, there is a financial angle to all of this. Well there would be - Nick Griffin's involved. Apart from the poor bloody members of Solidarity B, who are about to be ripped off for every penny they can spare via all the schemes that Griffin and Harrington will think up between them, another body from Harrington's Third Way mob has suddenly popped up from nowhere with a nice little potential earner.

Before we get into this one, we ought to state that we have seen evidence that not only supports this next part of the Solidarity disaster but also leads off to a couple of interesting tangents that we'll be picking up on in the very near future. That said, here's the next part of the story...

While he was General Secretary of Solidarity A, Pat Harrington was anxious to get the union to make use of a PR company named Accentuate. For various reasons - mostly to do with cost - this proposal was rejected by Harrington's fellow EC members. Probably just as well because Accentuate, which is run by Graham Williamson - former treasurer of the National Front and old chum of both Nick Griffin and Pat Harrington - appears to be a one-man PR company with absolutely nothing behind it. In fact, as far as we can ascertain, Williamson has no experience of PR beyond a single mention (from 2004) we could find on the internet, where his name is plugged in connection with one Dave Stephens (a fellow-member of the Third Way and one of the so-called Metric Martyrs) and the Customary Measures Society, one of those archaic groups that oppose the unnecessarily long and gruelling change to metric measurement.

Despite this, Williamson was keen to be associated with Solidarity A and indeed, intended to work for the union for one day a week for the princely sum of £100! No doubt, now that Solidarity B appears to be off the ground and under Harrington's control, Williamson will get his way.

Some way down the 'Strategy' document for Solidarity's PR requirements, which looks like it was largely gleaned from the Ladybird Book of PR Tips, mention is made of monitoring media reports of Solidarity's activities;

'...the first would be on the basis of ‘hits’ from press statements. This can be identified through using a firm like Durant’s who would monitor the media and supply us with identified coverage. I think this is a must regardless since we need to monitor what is being said about the Union. Whilst it will be very limited at present an active PR campaign will increase it significantly.'

We've no idea who 'Durant' is, though it wouldn't surprise us in the least if it turned out to be another ex-NF colleague of Griffin and current Third Way colleague of Williamson and Harrington, Dave Durant, who has stood for Third Way in a couple of elections (Hornchurch 2001 and Upminster 2005). More info on this would be appreciated.

Solidarity B has hardly been in existence for a few days and already the theme that is emerging is the familiar BNP theme of jobs for the family and friends. Harrington was, with Griffin's encouragement, demanding a wage for the work he was putting in despite the fact that everyone else was prepared to work for nothing in an attempt to enable the birth and growth of the union, and seems to be wangling a job for Williamson. If Durant is who we think he is, that's another one sorted - and so it goes on.

And who pays for all these fake jobs for these losers? The Solidarity membership, of course.

But jobs for the boys and financial shenanigans isn't all we associate with anything tainted by Nick Griffin. He's a great lover of political stunts too, as witnessed by the gag he wore at the first 'free speech' trial last year. Williamson seems to be on Griffin's wavelength because he's suggesting that Solidarity does what Griffin himself has done with the BNP - introduce a non-white character to deflect accusations of racism. The only real surprise is that they haven't (yet) got a Jew to come along too.

'The first ‘stunt’ should be a Press Conference launching the Union in Essex unveiling our first Sikh member Pramjit Sadra. This of course helps to counter the racist...accusations.'

Slightly out of date because the Third Way site mentions that Sadra actually joined Solidarity on or around April 20th of this year. Curiously Sadra, just like Nick Griffin, seems to be into all kinds of bizarre get rich quick schemes - search Google and take a look. It's interesting reading.

We'll leave this story for the moment because things are cooking in the background which might well mean there's a lot more about to happen. However, nil desperandum and all that jazz - we'll leave you with something to read in the form of Graham Williamson's great PR plan for Solidarity. Most of it seems to be the kind of stuff a schoolboy could have come up with in his lunch break but as the Solidarity B membership may well end up forking out £100 a day for this tosh, they should have the chance to see it first. Read on...

'PR STRATEGY FOR:

SOLIDARITY- The British Workers Union

The Union needs publicity in order to raise awareness. This will facilitate recruitment but also help create a ‘general’ (preferably positive) image, particularly to those ‘undecided’ and ‘outsiders’.

There are only three ways of reaching out to the general public, ‘Advertising’, ‘In-house’ promotion and Publicity.

Advertising

This will take the form of leaflets, both general and industry specific, but could include adverts in magazines (whether political or trade).

The advantage is that we control the message; the disadvantage is the limited coverage this can give us. Minor political parties struggle to get their message across when relying on leaflets and it might, for various reasons, be even harder to get our leaflets into the hands of a workforce (although it may only take one leaflet to bring a sympathetic worker ‘out’?).

Leaflets can also be costly and advertising even more so. Obviously however leafleting is still an absolute necessity since we can guarantee our address is given out, gives all members a role and is the only medium we can control. Beyond recruitment the impact will be negligible.

‘In-house’ promotion

This takes the form of advertising, promotional articles etc. within sympathetic circles e.g. BNP and Third Way events and publications..

Being a captive market this can initially boost membership and ultimately provide a steady stream of new recruits. The disadvantage is that it might a) raise questions of ‘entryism’ or accusations of being a front group b) make it more difficult to be independent.

It is a short circuit to increased membership but needs to be balanced at the earliest opportunity with parallel recruitment outside of politically sympathetic circles.

Publicity

The majority of the public’s awareness stems from what they read in the media, whether in print or on TV (and to a much lower extent on the radio). In comparison to direct advertising, including printed material, ‘third-party endorsement’ (or at least neutrality) is seen as more credible.

A good Public Relations strategy will seek to maximise its ‘horizontal’ hits i.e. volume of coverage as well as its ‘vertical’ i.e. positive hits in the media.

The ability to achieve positive coverage will rely upon the content and layout of any Press Release/feature and the relationship (even image) between the Union (or host PR company) and the media.

Press Release

This could either be about an event e.g. demonstration/AGM etc or a position e.g. on general industry matters e.g. minimum wage or on something specific e.g. a company’s labour relations.

To begin with it will be more of the latter but as we grow there will be more opportunities to be more active.

There is a ‘right’ way and style of writing any press release: Headline - who, what, why, where (preferably in a popular style) – quotes (harder to twist through fear of libel) – conclusion. You have to take account of the average journalists’ routines e.g. they cut from the bottom, prefer e-mails, like to put a face or voice behind a release etc. This comes with experience and professional interest i.e. tricks of the trade.

Features

Features on the Union or personalities will increase public credibility and tend to ‘humanise’ the organisation.

Such Organisational features rely upon a USP(s) (Unique Selling Point). For the Union this would be opposition to outsourcing, cheap migrant labour and PC. It will sell better if linked to actual events i.e. move of a call centre or factories e.g. “We oppose the loss of 200 jobs at British Gas’s Kettering Regional HQ because Management prefer using cheap labour in Malaysia. It’s deceiving the British public and putting people out of work”

It also has mileage being a Moral and Libertarian Union e.g. “the Fire Brigade sacked these officers but we welcome them because their personal or political views are no concern of ours”. Again examples of actually recruiting such people would help.

Personalities can be used because of who they are or where they come from. When Mick Shaw became Fire Brigade President one of my Regional papers did a page spread on him. The only link being he was born in Romford. It would be possible to get publicity for Solidarity officials. It can even use controversy in its favour. Again it humanises the Union.

Quotes

Quotes will be sought by journalists if they think you have something useful and credible to say. This might be direct to Head Office or a Press Office but can also be to known officials. At the last fuel protest I was contacted for a quote merely because I worked for a haulage company and I had credibility in the eyes of the journalist. I can imagine many such opportunities for Union officials with the right ‘priming’.

All the above can occur if a positive relationship with the media is achieved through regularity, personal contact and credibility. The latter has the same dynamic as between the public and the media. If the recipient believes you ‘have clean hands’ they will take more note. By using a PR company you immediately excite the snob in the journalist i.e. this organisation is serious (might actually pay for the privilege!) and a belief that such a company is likely to be a little more objective than his client.

THE STRATEGY

Defensive as well as Positive

Whilst the Union has now been well and truly born most of the publicity so far has been rather negative i.e. it’s a BNP front-group. Whilst there has been good defensive work on the blogs and to a lesser extent with some of the media it is going to difficult if we are always chasing our tail and reacting to events rather than creating them.

Of course the Union faces opposition because a) of its patriotic position b) BNP links. They are attempting to limit the Union’s freedom of action vis a vis neutral actors (businesses, media etc) and put-off potential recruits. They are treating the Union as if it were a political party by ascribing to it policies i.e. a 'scab' or 'racist' union. This however can be turned to our advantage (see later).

We need to minimise the number of opponents and their effectiveness. There will be a war of position with and within them. I believe our PR strategy will not only achieve this aim but of course create lots of positive publicity at the same time, leading to more recruits and a better image, leading to improved coverage translated into more recruits etc.

Positive

In the first year we need to in the:

Short term

a) Send out National Press Releases introducing the Union.
b) Organise ‘Stunts’ to attract interest.
c) Continue with defensive activity on blogs and appropriate press releases.

Medium term

This occurs once we have actual campaigns under way and appointed officials. We can then bring in event press releases, features and quotes.

To begin with we need to prepare Press releases on selected issues e.g. off shoring, whilst targeting sectors e.g. trade journals and the like.

The first ‘stunt’ should be a Press Conference launching the Union in Essex unveiling our first Sikh member Pramjit Sadra. This of course helps to counter the racist and ER accusations.

This conference should be largely for a selected local press (and any sympathetic journalists we may know of). In this way we can control the output and minimise opposition. We should tape/record the event for showing on web and promoting to the media at large.

Remuneration

There are only two ways; piece or daily rates. The first would be on the basis of ‘hits’ from press statements. This can be identified through using a firm like Durant’s who would monitor the media and supply us with identified coverage. I think this is a must regardless since we need to monitor what is being said about the Union. Whilst it will be very limited at present an active PR campaign will increase it significantly.

The other way of remuneration would be daily rates say of £100. Initially say one day per week. Although the work wouldn’t/shouldn’t be restricted to one specific day i.e. it would be carried out as and when it is a simple way of controlling expenditure. The evidence of the effectiveness of the PR strategy would still be required even if not directly tied to ‘hits’ at this stage.

Conclusion

I am keen to launch the PR strategy because a) I need to try and build my business b) explore all my skills and ideas c) I believe the Union has a massive potential and that a great deal of its success will rely upon an effective PR campaign(s) d) I am a member of the Union and wish it to succeed.

I await your deliberations.'

Don't hold your breath, is our advice.

Solidarity disaster goes critical as criminal investigation is threatened

Several correspondents have written to bring us up to date with the current bizarre situation regarding the BNP's fake union Solidarity. Rather than simply report an update though, we felt it would be useful to go through the timeline and the relevant sections of the available documents which are essential in understanding precisely what's happened and who has played what role in creating the chaotic situation that currently exists, which seems to have led to two separate Solidarity unions running independently of each other, both disputing its right to exist over the other. Once we've dealt with that, we'll report on the position as it stands now.

The three principal characters involved in this fiasco are Pat Harrington (General Secretary), Clive Potter (President) and Tim Hawke (vice-President) with Billy McLinden (current Acting General Secretary) playing the Harrington understudy and Nick Griffin (BNP leader) very clearly playing the villain of the piece.

As is made clear by the minutes of the meetings, which are available on the Solidarity web site this whole sorry saga began at the meeting of the Solidarity Executive Committee (consisting of the three principal characters named above) on May 20th. The meeting was quorate (which simply means that votes that were made at that meeting are binding when passed by a simple majority - a small but important point) and the accounts were duly submitted by Harrington, who was apparently acting as treasurer. Rather than interpret the minutes, we reproduce the relevant portions below exactly as they appear.

'1. Accounts Review

Proceedings were opened with the President insisting on a review of the long-requested accounts from the General Secretary / Treasurer.

General Secretary / Treasurer provides a piece of paper with his basic financial notes written on them. However, no receipts were provided or printouts of Account Balance made. President expressed his deep concerns regarding this and requests full accounts to be sent to him after meeting. Discussion takes place where we agree to search among our membership list towards finding a suitable candidate with book-keeping experience to become the Treasurer but that perhaps the President should take over this role once the accounts are in proper order. President is reluctant and states that this issue of a new treasurer must be delayed until the accounts are in order.

5. Discussion of Upcoming events

General Secretary discussed the plans he has made to promote the union at an open parade event called July 12th. Concerns were made by Vice-President that we mustn’t become partisan with regards to the Northern Ireland situation with Vice-President highlighting the RMT Bob Crow example. However, General Secretary who has considerable understanding in this region ensured that this wouldn’t place us on one particular side of the political divide that effects that area.

General Secretary discussed how he had been in discussions with the Chairmen of the BNP (currently the Unions main supporter) and that with the upcoming August BNP RWB family festival he had agreed (without EC consent) to holding a stall / two workshops and personally making a speech on the main podium. Vice-President was extremely concerned due to other upcoming events, such as the union Coffee Campaign, which would not give us time to feature and prepare for workshops, General Secretary expressed how this wouldn’t be a problem and would leave the workshops in the hands of the Vice-President.

Vice-President requested clarification on the term workshop, but none was given. President agreed with the RWB event having a Union stall but also expressed considerably confusion regarding what the workshops involved as well as the speech material that the General Secretary would use, particularly in regards to his terminology with previous adverts and articles that he had published without EC consent. The stall concept was approved but the speech and two workshops were not.

8. Investigation Declared

President returns to the area of the Accounts, accusing the General Secretary / Treasurer of not being transparent with regards to Union finances. Vice-President agrees with this and states his surprise at the lack of account information provided and its format.

General Secretary / Treasurer stated that this is his duty and trust must be shown. Vice-President criticises the General Secretary / Treasurer’s hiring of accountants stating that no 3 quotes for accountant were provided and that EC concerns were ignored. Also that the company did not provide a clear fee. General Secretary / Treasurer stated that time was against him due to restraints, when President expressed that the accounts could have been produced many months ago as requested, General Secretary / Treasurer stated that such comments were not helpful.

President expressed concerns over a meeting requested by the Union’s main sponsor Chairmen Nick Griffin on the 05/04/07 (where the Chairmen informed the President / Vice-President that the General Secretary / Treasurer needed a computer and small union salary from the union funds. This was opposed by the President and Vice-President due to financial situation of the union). General Secretary / Treasurer stated that his close friendship with Chairmen led him to express his requirements.

President states that this behaviour showed contempt for the EC and so that he would seek an investigation with concerns regarding the General Secretary / Treasurer’s actions. General Secretary / Treasurer stated that this couldn’t happen since the EC would have to make the judgement and if the General Secretary was suspended there would be no Quorum. General Secretary / Treasurer asked for Vice-Presidents input into this disagreement and he stated that if any concerns exist then an investigation should take place to resolve the issue. With the Vice-President’s approval the President confirms that a formal investigation would take place where the General Secretary / Treasurer would then be temporary suspended during the process. General Secretary / Treasurer refuses to accept the legitimacy of this.'

What is immediately obvious is that there has been a prior and continuing problem with the accounts - the phrase 'long-requested' gives that away along with 'President expressed that the accounts could have been produced many months ago as requested', and when the accounts arrive, there are no receipts and the accounts appear to be simply rough notes.

It's also pretty obvious that Harrington has not been keeping his colleagues au fait with what else he's been up to. In section 5, Harrington states that he has agreed (with Griffin) to hold workshops, run a stall and make a speech at the BNP's annual beer-fest, the Red White and Blue festival (RWB). In fact he doesn't appear to have kept his Executive Committe colleagues up to speed on much at all, as witnessed by the bitchy 'previous adverts and articles that he had published without EC consent' remark.

Quite rightly in our opinion, the EC expresses its concerns at the state of the accounts and then goes on to criticise Harrington, who seems to have regarded Solidarity as his own little toy, for taking on an accountant without bothering to get the required three quotes for their services. This sense of ownership by Harrington is shown up dramatically when it's reported that his old friend Nick Griffin had butted in by demanding a computer and a wage for him - rejected by the two more sensible members of the EC on the grounds that the union couldn't afford it.

At this point I would have kicked Harrington out of the meeting with a thick ear but Hawke and Potter, being far more patient, followed the proper procedure and decided to suspend him pending an investigation into both his behaviour and the state of the accounts. Though Harrington disputes the validity of the suspension, it's clear from the minutes that it was properly conducted.

The timeline gets a bit hazy for the next few weeks but Solidarity tidies things up with a fairly startling News Bulletin that outlines the events as they arrive in quick succession.

'On the 3rd June 2007 a Special Executive Meeting was held where the General Secretary was suspended pending an investigation. A temporary Acting General Secretary [Billy McLinden] was nominated and approved. This individual was chosen to head this investigation due to his experience in fighting corruption in the past. On the 3rd June 2007 the suspended General Secretary was informed of his status and asked to cooperate with the investigation.

An alarming amount of evidence has been obtained regarding Mr Harrington’s conduct. He has refused to relinquish any details with regards to the finances and so was redrawn from the Solidarity main account. He also set-up a Paypal online account, whose access codes he has consistently refused to provide. On the 20th June 2007, just over a week before the expected completion of the investigation, Mr Harrington hijacked the Solidarity website by contacting the sites host (a friend of his) and displayed his own altered version.'

This is extraordinary behaviour for a man who purports to be the General Secretary of a union - even one supported by the BNP. Anyone with any sense would have resigned, issued a statement defending himself to anyone who listened and walked away from the whole mess with as much dignity as possible held in reserve. Instead of that, Harrington goes off the deep end, hijacks the account and the website, and announces that he is Solidarity.

Is this the action of a rational man or a mini-dictator, we ask? Ah, well it depends why he did it the way he did, and the entrance of the BNP at this point tends to assume a little devious planning going on in the background.

It seems a little too much of a coincidence that Harrington took over the Solidarity website (run by Nick Griffin's chum Calvary Church School bomber Lambertus Neiuwhof) on exactly the same day that the BNP posted a notice on its website stating that Solidarity had been the 'subject of a far-left sabotage bid' and that these lefties were planning to replacing Harrington with someone [McLinden] who 'could well be a Marxist agent provocateur'. We reported on this statement here and we're not repeating it all here except to remind readers that it was in this statement that the BNP called for an Extraordinary General Meeting. As Harrington and now the BNP have the membership list, the accounts and the website, it seems they'll have their way. But not without a fight.

The Solidarity News Bulletin continues;

'Since then he has undemocratically declared himself the General Secretary of Solidarity with the understanding that he, and he alone, leads the union. Be assured that the Certification Office is now investigating this with deep concern.

Concerns have been expressed that Vice-President Tim Hawke has as yet refused to sign off the accounts of the union, which needs to be handed into the Certification Office shortly. His response to this is...

“I have strong reasons to believe that the AR21 form (accounts document) is highly inaccurate but have been unable to verify this due to the suspended General Secretary / Treasurer’s refusal to provide me the union receipts and balance print offs. This document is the Official Annual Returns form as presented to the CO, and if I signed off this deeply dubious version of our financial report I could very well be complicit in Union Corruption”

The President’s response to this is...

“Mr Harrington has placed the Vice-President in an unfortunate position. However, the Vice-President is an individual of high integrity and should Mr Harrington provide the details that he claimed to have presented to the mystery accountants and the auditors, then I know that the Vice-President would sign off the accounts. The current standing EC is deeply and generally opposed to union corruption, and we will stand up against any such poisonous actions since we are custodians of the Union members money and we won’t abuse this.”

With the exception of the Paypal account, your finances are safe. However, if you pay via Paypal we would strongly recommend that you cancel your subscription.

Once the investigation is complete, we shall ensure that all our members receive details of any evidence discovered and what actions we shall take if questionable activities have taken place.

Due to the unprecedented actions of the suspended General Secretary / Treasurer, the standing EC have been forced to plan an Extraordinary Executive Meeting into this individual’s actions with concerns towards necessary disciplinary action.

We are aware that Mr Harrington has called for an Emergency General Meeting, and that he states that requests should be sent to his personal home address. For a suspended General Secretary to act in this way, before the results of an investigation into his conduct is even complete, is totally inappropriate. In addition, any declaration stating that he is the union’s leader is highly unconstitutional.

Therefore the Executive Committee does not recognise this EGM. However, if members have any concerns or requests to make to the Executive, then please feel free to write to Solidarity’s Head Office at PO Box 8127, Leicester, LE21 9AN.'

On June 26th, with no website and no access to funds, Tim Hawke emailed us to attempt to put the record straight - certainly as far as the Hawke/Potter side of the argument is concerned - but it had already become clear that the BNP was deliberately manipulating things to re-establish what it sees as its union. In fact, since that date there has been no attempt, as far as we know, to suggest arbitration or even a simple meeting between the two sides to discuss the problems.

Clearly the divide is too great. On the one hand there is a pair of people who are apparently anxious to get a union that will support their own peculiar viewpoint up and running and on the other is Nick Griffin and the BNP, who want the union for some other reason. It can't be the same reason or the BNP would leave it in the hands of Hawke, Potter and now McLinden. Our guess would be the potential it has to be an earner for Griffin/the BNP. If the union miraculously managed to take off and, for example, the entire membership of the BNP joined, the potential skim (political fund) for the BNP would be enormous.

The BNP Dirty Tricks Dept is working overtime. On July 5th, an article appeared on the BNP website stating;

'It has emerged that a significant number of letters to the old Leicester PO Box were not getting answered. We do not know if this was an internal failure, or if left-wing postmen were interfering with deliveries there. Either way it is essential to stop using that address, particularly for sending money. Any letters or emails advertising or purporting to come from Leicester should be ignored, and any literature advertising that address must be destroyed'

We are assured that all of this is entirely untrue, that letters are being answered and that there is no internal failure with responding to mail. To interfere with the running of any organisation in this way is surely a criminal offence? If not, it damn well should be.

'New members are also entitled and encouraged to add their voices to this call.'

Pending any Extraordinary General Meeting there should be no new members. Membership should be suspended, particularly in a case such as this, to avoid one side packing the membership temporarily simply to achieve its aim, which is precisely what the BNP is doing.

'Please note that Solidarity’s Paypal system is working properly and is in safe hands.'

Indeed? Whose are those? Nick Griffins? Pat Harringtons? We know all about Griffin and his apparently insatiable lust for money but what about Harrington? Well, we've already seen what a dodgy character he is - prepared to lie and connive his way back to the top of the union (along with his computer and wage packet, no doubt) and content to see those who question his financial integrity or indeed capability thrown out unceremoniously. In fact, he's remarkably like Griffin in that respect.

But the chickens might well be coming home to roost. Several of our correspondents have consistently mentioned the disappearance of £400 from the Solidarity account that, according to the union's bank statements, appears to been transferred by Harrington after his suspension by Potter and Hawke. We have no way of knowing if this is true but if it is, that is arguably a criminal act. We understand that this is how it's seen by the genuine Solidarity leadership and that the police have been or are being contacted regarding taking further action.

While they're investigating that, the police might also care to take a look at the legality of what Harrington and Griffin have done to the union, with an especially close look at Griffin and his request via the BNP site that people send membership money to what is now effectively (though not morally) Pat Harrington's private Paypal account and PO Box in Edinburgh.

After this disastrous beginning we would be surprised if the Certification Officer granted any kind of credibility to Solidarity. If it stays in the hands of Hawke, Potter and McLinden it'll be impotent and will no doubt collapse soon through lack of interest and support, though one never knows. If it goes to Harrington and Griffin it will be based in corruption before it ever really started and any meaningful funds will be siphoned off into the BNP's ever-empty piggy bank or on the next stupid idea that Griffin has for making more money from hot air.

Either way, Solidarity is doomed to collapse completely in the fairly near future. Pending the outcome of any criminal investigation (if one actually takes place), Griffin and co will more than likely bulldoze their way through the democratic process and that'll be the end of the union.

One wonders why the BNP wanted a union of its own in the first place - just a few years ago, its manifesto said 'People whose freedoms must be curbed are the pressure groups, the media and trade unions’.

That's presumably unless money can be made out of having one of your own.

BNP discards democracy completely to force takeover of 'independent' Solidarity

When the BNP launched its fake union Solidarity back in February, it made much of the 'fact' that it was independent, not linked to any political party and that its work would be carried out without the inevitable corruption that occurred when unions and political parties got too cosy.

In theory this sounded reasonable and if it was true, attractive to, for example, a BNP-supporter who had been sacked from his job as a teacher for looking at extreme right-wing web sites during teaching time who the traditional and far more sensible unions wouldn't touch with a bargepole, whatever a bargepole might be.

Naturally, as is the case with pretty much anything to do with the British National Party, it wasn't true at all. The BNP set Solidarity up, its funds established it, Nick Griffin put in his old National Front buddy Pat Harrington as boss and even the Solidarity website is run by the BNP in the form of South African white supremacist, terrorist and school bomber, Lambertus Nieuwhof, who appears to be close friends with Griffin and taking a leading role in the BNP.

There have been a few developments with Solidarity, though you would do well to read the preceding articles and the comments accompanying them in order to make any sense out of this increasingly bizarre fiasco. The articles are here, here and here.

In response to the allegations and the attempt to get rid of him, Harrington has not only been posting here at Lancaster UAF but at a number of other places where you would be more likely to find a rabid member of the extreme right - the nazi Stormfront forum, for instance, where he attempted to justify the BNP takeover by avoiding the issue completely:

'An Extraordinary General Meeting has been called for July 14. Our constitution states that 2/3rds of our membership may convene one. The membership is the ultimate authority in our Union. Two or three people don't decide the direction or future of our Union.'

Well oddly enough they do if they're the Executive Committee. That's how Executives work. The job of the Executive is to take executive decisions when and where necessary and this is precisely what Hawke and Potter did. Seeing a problem with the accounts that apparently related directly to Harrington, they co-opted McLinden on as General Secretary and suspended Harrington pending investigation. This all seems (to someone who has been on an Exec) right and proper.

Harrington has patently panicked and so has the BNP. If nothing was wrong, he and the BNP should have sat back on their haunches, waited for the investigation to conclude then returned to the same position. Hawke and Potter would probably have resigned and the next AGM or EGM could have produced new officers. That's not quite how it happened though. The BNP immediately played its only card (the one where the union has been infiltrated by the left) and decided to go for an Extraordinary General Meeting stating clearly on its website that Harrington would be re-instated and the Exec increased to seven rather than the three it is at present - with the majority being from the BNP. To hell with democracy and possible problems with the accounts - this is after all, the BNP!

Not only did the BNP announce that this is what they would do, Harrington appears to have completely locked Hawke and Potter out of the accounts and Nieuwhof has locked them out of the website. This has clearly put them in the appalling position of being unable to tell the membership the truth about the situation except via this and one or two other blogs. During all this there has been a concerted campaign to brand Hawke, Potter and to a certain extent McLinden as 'traitors' - presumably to the complete subverviance and domination required by Adolf Griffin.

Solidarity has fallen at the very first hurdle - financially, democratically and politically, and the BNP has, if you'll pardon the expression, come out of this looking like shit. Harrington - whether he is or not (and we have no idea if he is or not) - has acted like a crook desperate to cover up his crimes, and the BNP as a so-called political party, with Griffin's explicit support, has been complicit every step of the way.

One of the posters on Stormfront had it right (for a change) when he said:

'The idea that Solidarity can operate as an extension of Nick Griffin's fuhrerprinzip is sheer fantasy - it could have no legal basis as a union if it operated in this fashion.'

and

'...this row involves the very people who were appointed to run Solidarity when the union was set up. The inevitable cry of "traitor" whenever anyone disagrees with Griffin is getting as predictable as it is pathetic.'

So true.

Solidarity - an email update from the Vice-President Tim Hawke

Following all the fuss around the BNP's fake union Solidarity and the two articles we produced over the past few days (here and here), we have now received an email from Solidarity Vice-President Tim Hawke that attempts to put the record straight(ish). We provide the whole thing to keep you up to date with the apparent chaos that surrounds anything the BNP organises or Nick Griffin gets his sticky little mitts on.

Dear Sir / Madam

I have recently been informed that the internal activities of our union have been brought to your attention.

Since the events have been aired in public, may I set a few issues straight. On the 20th May 2007 during an Executive Committee Meeting in London, Mr Potter (who is in my opinion a man of great integrity) expressed his deep concerns regarding the financial clarity of the accounts. Mr Harrington refused to provide the accounts in details, even though the requests for these went back a month or more and so stated that he would begin the process of an investigation. Harrington refused this but I agreed. The minutes will confirm this – there’s your quorum 2-1 approved

On the 3rd of June Mr Potter requested that I to attend a Special Executive Meeting in Liverpool (such meetings do not require a quorum within the constitution) and Mr Harrington was suspended. A member with considerable union experience and who has been a member since Feb 2007 (the Membership and his membership card number will confirm this) agreed to head the Investigation due to his impartial status and was chosen as the Acting General Secretary, however he has made it clear that he would abstain from voting on any issue regarding Mr Harrington and that he views his role as temporary.

Regardless of the hype, myself and Mr Potter have driven this union with the genuine intention of fighting for the workers of this country who are being exploited on a daily basis, the rich poor divide is widening but the current unions (in my opinion) have neglected that struggles that I personally witness regularly onsite,

Our core 6 principles of opposition are totally genuine to me, and Mr Potter if you consider his actions. Union corruption is a terrible act of betrayal to members and I hope that you would support our activities in combating this. Be assured that the concerns are serious and that I would fight for the ending of any corrupt organisation to prevent it from spreading.

With regards to the BNP, it seems that Mr Harrington has extremely close links with its chairmen and have hatched a takeover plan before the investigation is complete – a possible sign of guilt? During the many months that I took off work to advance this union, I met many decent BNP members including Mr Potter and would hope that it was understood that most members are good people just wanting what’s best for their nearest and dearest.

Once the investigation is complete we should all know more, but the certification office are investigating due to our contacting them, however if others wish to do so then they have our full support.

Yours truly,
Tim Hawke
Vice-President of Solidarity

P.S. A members bulletin will be dispatched shortly informing them of the situation, what a shame that this could not have been done in a more professional manner

Although we clearly will not agree with Mr Hawke over the integrity of Solidarity or anyone involved in it, we thank him for emailing us to let us know the current situation as he sees it.

One point that we think is worth making is that it's our belief, based on advice we've received from a couple of different and trusted sources in the past few days, that by refusing to hand over the disputed accounts, Harrington is apparently acting illegally.

We wonder if Solidarity is considering any legal action to obtain these accounts before the BNP forces an Extraordinary General Meeting and puts a stop to any investigation, which it certainly will if given half a chance?

BNP's Solidarity situation worsens - fake union under threat

The BNP's fake-union Solidarity appears close to collapse after the apparent suspension of the General Secretary Patrick Harrington.

Harrington, formerly involved with the National Front, was allegedly suspended from his duties as General Secretary of the BNP-allied union pending an investigation into accusations of financial irregularities.

Information supplied to Lancaster UAF suggests that Harrington has refused to cooperate with the investigation by refusing to disclose details of the Solidarity accounts. Indeed, he appears to have gone a few steps further, blocking access to the union's Paypal account which we're told, has all the membership money tucked away in it - prompting threats of legal action unless the money is forthcoming.

The Executive Committee of Solidarity, which now appears to consist only of Clive Potter (President) and Tim Hawke (Vice-President), have taken action after Hawke refused to sign the first year accounts (required by the Certification Authority before, we gather, making Solidarity a bona fide union) after becoming aware of the 'irregularities', prompting the BNP to go into automatic blame the reds mode, claiming that Solidarity had been the subject of a far-left sabotage bid. Rubbish of course, but pretty much what you'd expect from the corrupt and single-minded BNP.

We were supplied with a further communication allegedly sent to all members from the Executive Committee. This communication, while interesting in itself, had other interesting information contained within it.

'In a last ditch attempt to prevent the investigation from coming to light, Mr Harrington contacted the Host Provider of the website (a past friend of his) and has replaced the website with his own. He is currently misleading members into the believe [sic] that he is the Leader of the union, however this is not the case and we ask members to be patient with us.'

This presumably is a reference to Calvary Church School bomber Lambertus Neiuwhof, who apparently now runs most of the BNP's web-based operations now through his company Vidronic Online. There's more about the truly despicable Neiuwhof and his connections with the BNP and its subsidiaries here and here.

Accusations and counter-accusations are flying about in all directions. Harrington (assuming that the note we have received really is from Harrington) has responded to his suspension by claiming breach of the Data Protection Act (though he then breaches the Act himself by giving some personal details of one of his accusers which must have come straight off the membership list), complaining about his 'unconstitutional' removal from office and making another call for an Extraordinary General Meeting to increase the Executive Committee of the union to seven members, mostly BNP-nominated, thus giving control over completely to the party. He then takes on the tried and tested 'sabotage' defence but rather than us having to dissect it all, here it is for you to read and nod off to;

'A malicious email is being circulated which I understand you have been sent a copy of. First, let me apologise to you that personal information that you supplied to our Union is being misused in this way. I will be making every effort to ascertain who has supplied this information and whether they have committed offences under the Data Protection Act.

An unconstitutional attempt is unfortunately being made by two members of our Executive, Clive Potter and Tim Hawke, to remove me as General Secretary of our Union. A secret meeting was held in which they appointed a William McLinden both a 'Special Investigator' and 'Acting General Secretary'. Our Constitution is available on our Website. You will see that for Executive meeting to be quorate all three members must be present (strangely, I was not invited!). As I was not present any purported decisions are unconstitutional. Additionally our Constitution states that the General Secretary will remain in post so long as he satisfies the majority of members. Mr McLinden has been a member of our Union for little more than a few weeks. When he joined he provided a Liverpool Street address but a North Cheshire telephone number. His actions since joining have been factional and disruptive. Investigations regarding Mr McLinden are ongoing.

I am supporting calls for an Emergency General Meeting on 14 July so that our members can decide themselves who has acted wrongly and who should lead our Union forward.

The principal political backers of our Union - Third Way and the British National Party - have published statements on their website backing me and calling for an EGM. So determined are they that the Union should be secured that they are mounting an email recruitment campaign this week which has already resulted in a surge of new memberships.

Reference is made in the email to allegations made against me. I have requested details of any allegations but these have yet to be provided. Our first year accounts were prepared by a professional firm of accountants. They were audited by a Barrister and Kenny Smith (head of BNP admin) as lay auditors. They were shown all bank statements and receipts. Once submitted to the Certification Officer these will be published on our website and circulated to members. The second year accounts are currently being prepared and will then go through the same process. As Union finances are subject to many legal checks there should be no room for such unfounded allegations.

I am acting in my role as Treasurer of the Union. I am concerned that the financial information of our members is kept confidential. As I bear legal responsibility (currently) under our Constitution I intend to ensure that everything is done properly. I have no intention of handing over control whilst remaining legally liable.

Anyone who uses PayPal will know how it works. All transaction details are automatically recorded. These will form part of our accounts. Membership payments come in, a PayPal fee is deducted and money transferred (once it reaches a reasonable level) to our main Union bank account.

I have suggested, however, that due to my heavy workload in other areas the Executive should be expanded to seven and that a specific post of Treasurer should be created. This would allow me to concentrate on writing and representing our members at grievances, disciplinaries and tribunals. I have pointed out that under the current constitution the responsibilities of the GS are onerous (particularly for a voluntary worker). I look forward to handing over my financial responsibilities to the new Treasurer!

I believe a deliberate attempt is being made to disrupt our Union on a large-scale. This is aimed at preventing a major recruitment campaign that was planned and sabotaging the submission of our first year accounts (a legal requirement). The wreckers have even threatened to call for our Union to be de-registered. I am determined that this will fail. I will take all necessary steps to safeguard our Union pending the decisions of our membership at the EGM. Our website has been secured and I will move to secure other vital areas in co-operation with the wide team of members who have rallied to defend our Union.

When the EGM is held the members alone will decide who has acted wrongly and who has been true. I urge you to continue your support.

If you receive any further malicious communications please copy them to me as I will be looking actively at how those responsible can best be called to account.'

We draw your attention to the line we have highlighted in bold above: 'The wreckers have even threatened to call for our Union to be de-registered.' So have we and we will continue to ask trades unionists to investigate the process of any such move and take action through their unions immediately.

BNP's fake union Solidarity already up against the ropes

Potter, Lee and Walker

Coup d'etat or power-struggle at Solidarity?

Update: According to one of our contributors (check Comments); 'There does seem to be some disruption going on regarding the union. Two members of the Executive appear to have taken upon themselves the right to 'suspend' the general secretary at an inquorate 'meeting' on the ever of a massive recruiting drive. Against all the rules of natural justice, they brought in an investigator who was also to become 'acting general secretary'. In other words, he had a vested interest in taking the job from the incumbent general secretary, Mr Harrington. From the correspondence I have seen, it looks like this investigator had already prejudged the issue and Mr Harrington had to go! Not so much an investigation as a coup d'etat. They just weren't very good about it. The EGM will sort this matter out on behalf of the rank-and-file members.'

A report that has appeared on the BNP website reveals that the fake union set up by the party is already in trouble and seems likely to go the same way as all the other ventures the BNP has ever been involved in, like Nick Griffin's washout of a money-spinner Affordable Cars and the Albion Life insurance scam.

The source of the problem is that, according to the BNP, 'an unconstitutional attempt has been made to remove General Secretary Pat Harrington from his position'. Harrington has something of a fine union pedigree - he was expelled from the RMT. He was also one of the National Front's 'political soldiers' in the late 1980s alongside Nick Griffin. Other BNP activists involved in the project include Jay Lee, who was recently booted out of Aslef, and John Walker, the BNP's national treasurer, who has had his own troubles with the T&G. Clive Potter, the possible President of Solidarity is a long-time BNP activist from Leicester, who was expelled from Unison for improper conduct. Potter is still listed as President on Solidarity's homepage though it was our understanding that he had been ousted months ago. More info on this point would be appreciated.

The BNP produces its usual kneejerk response to problems in the ranks, blaming any difficulties on somebody else, usually 'reds'. In this case, the party goes into overdrive, claiming that 'Solidarity has been the subject of a far-left sabotage bid, involving several individuals working as a team' and that the bid to boot the useless Harrington out of office 'and to replace him with an unknown individual from Merseyside whose involvement in the BNP has extended to just a few weeks...the local organiser and activists concluded from his behaviour that he could well be a Marxist agent provocateur'.

However, the real problem is made apparent in the next section of the article - and regular readers of this blog will recognise it straight away as a problem that seems to exist wherever the BNP sticks its corporate nose in.

'...Tim Hawke [Solidarity Vice-President] continues to refuse to sign first year accounts so that these can be submitted to the Certification Officer in time. This is despite the fact that the accounts were prepared by an accountant and have been independently and professionally audited by a Barrister and Kenny Smith (head of BNP admin).'

Yes indeed. The BNP - or rather one of its many subsidiaries, is in financial trouble (again). There is really only one reason for not signing accounts off and that is that you do not believe that they are a true statement of the financial affairs of the stated organisation. Clearly, Tim Hawke has doubts about either their accuracy or possibly their legality, and it wouldn't be the first time that a treasurer or someone connected with the financial side of a BNP venture has balked at leaving themselves open to litigation by signing off on a load of rubbish - at least a couple of treasurers have been booted out after doing the same thing.

One of the 'purposes' listed for the formation of Solidarity was to avoid what the BNP interpreted as union corruption. Its statement on formation clearly says; 'We want independent unions that are fully accountable to its members whose finances are transparent...' by which one assumes it to mean the organisation's finances are transparent and not the member's finances, although that's certainly open to doubt.

To get around the problem of awkward people inconveniently refusing to sign dodgy accounts, the BNP proposes to call an Emergency General Meeting to completely subvert the democracy it claims to uphold and increase the size of the Executive from the current three, presumably Harrington, Potter and Hawke, to seven, the additional four being one from Third Way (Harrington's current political affiliation) and a vote-winning three from the BNP. This would ensure that, no matter what dubious transactions take place and no matter what goes on that the members are kept unaware of, all decisions will be made by the patently corrupt BNP and the very co-operative Pat Harrington, Nick Griffin's buddy from the old days.

Under Item 14(a) of the present constitution of the fake union, 'The Executive Committee may suspend or dismiss any Solidarity officer in cases of misconduct. It has the power to remove any incompetent or insubordinate Branch or Regional Officer.'

It looks like Tim Hawke has had it then.

It also looks like the BNP is attempting to retain complete control over the union - which is certainly not the impression the party was trying to make when it first set the whole thing up - presumably because if it ever takes off (which it never will) it'll make pots of money, most of which will be siphoned off to the nearest handy pockets. These accounts, along with membership numbers, should make interesting reading - if they're ever allowed to appear and, of course, if they're accurate.

The BNP and the BNP's union - democracy and accountability in action. Well, not quite.