Retiring General Secretary Doug Rut contend yes pect ye
NUT conference was greeted by a long standing ovation. Cynics might question why his furious attack on New Labour's liberalisation of education had not come much earlier in period in office: it's not as if the World Trade Organisation's wholesale attack on public services has just come to light.
McAvoy's speech bottled out of a more direct attack on the leaders of the other TUC affiliated teaching unions and on its General Secretary, Brendan Barber for signing up to the Governments workforce remodelling" plans, which are designed to replace qualified teachers with poorly paid classroom assistants and more computers.
The root of McAvoy's anger is the frustration he feels at his powerlessness to influence New Labours education policy as it seeks to dismantle the post war education settlement and introduce an educations market which he rightly believes will massively increase the divisions that exist at present between state and private education. The state will provide a minimum curriculum - focussing on employability - what he denounced as the "Tesco approach". Anything above that will have to be paid for by parents. The entitlement to a broad and balanced curriculum (introduced, ironically, under the Tories) has been ditched. Education, except for those who can afford to pay, will be replaced by "learning" to compete more effectively in the jobs market.
In the past, union leaderships from the Broad Left have put their faith in influencing government policy. The problem now is that New Labour no longer shares this outlook. On the contrary, they see the teacher unions as obstacles to marketisation and want to attack on pension rights, and workforce remodelling (in the guise of reducing teacher's workload) are an open attack. McAvoy's anger is a cry of rage at the realisation that the "reclaim Labour" position is no longer tenable: New Labour won't play anymore and their allies within are completely in thrall to Blair's politics.
Steve Sinnott, the right's favourite declared he would not go "cap in hand to the Government". He won't. He'll go on his hands and knees.
The Broad Left are divided in the election, with McAvoy's anointed heir, John Bangs standing against Sinnott. The latter is the bookie's favourite but it wouldn't do his chances any good to proclaim his willingness to do business with Blair in public.
The bitterness between the factions was a sight to see. Broad Left speakers were left high and dry on the Conference floor as they publicly refused to support each other. McAvoy's valedictory speech was a nonetoo-coded warning to conference about Sinnott's real position.
In the light of the divisions on the right, a united left candidate would have a real chance. lan Murch from the Campaign for a Fighting Democratic Union effectively imposed himself as the left candidate and was then backed by the Socialist Teachers Alliance
On paper, there is little to separate him from the positions of the STA, and the size of his vote will be a crucial indication of the willingness of the members to take on New Labour:
Mark Serwotka's inspiring speech to the opening session of Conference in which he the Public Sector shows what is possible with a united left.
For this reason, Martin Powell-Davies' solo run is daft sectarianism. Upping the profile of the Socialist Party and preparing the ground for a run at the Executive from Inner London in a couple of years, are not serious reasons for dividing the left.
The STA and the SWP combined well in conference on the issue of the political fund -.... ed left - without saying what form t should take. The STA leadership has also l its way
Tempted by the possibilities in the fr menting forces around McAvoy, they lac clear political project and are open to disc sion of unity
The Local Associations Pay Conference June 26 should be the opportunity to t