|
I.R.S.P. statement on crisis in Maghaberry Following a white line Picket in west Belfast on Saturday in support of the republican socialist and republican prisoners in Maghaberry, the IRSP have called for direct lines of communication to be established between prisoner representatives and the prison regime. Since Easter Sunday the situation has seriously deteriorated, conditions endured republican prisoners are a direct infringement on their human rights and cannot be allowed to continue. Maghaberry prison regime is presently a rudderless ship and prisoners have been forced by the prison regime in to protest action. IRSP spokesperson Paul Little said: The prisoners at present are on a 23-hour lock up, unable to wash or use the toilet and are refusing to eat on such unhygienic conditions in their cells, Prisoner have also been assaulted by prison officers. We believe this is in direct violation of their human rights, the prisoners have two basic demands Free association and an end to needless and degrading strip searches, these are fair and equitable demands and have no direct bearing on security within the prison”. The IRSP will initially be seeking meetings with both the Prisoners Ombudsman and the Human Rights Commission to discus the current plight of the prisoners, it is imperative that this situation in Maghaberry is not allowed to continue and dialogue between all those involved is needed to bring a speedy resolution to this issue. The IRSP is fully committed to supporting the prisoners in finding a solution to the current empass. STATEMENT ENDS Posted in: Uncategorized | Comments Off
(1) Armed Resistance In 1994 the INLA put in place a no first strike policy and in 1998 called a complete cease-fire. Both of these decisions were based on its political analysis and monitoring of the changing military and political environment. The recent progress on loyalist decommissioning can be traced back to the INLA’s “no first strike policy” of 1994 and the INLA acknowledges this progressive step by loyalism. The RSM has been informed by the INLA that following a process of serious debate, consultation and analysis, it has concluded that the armed struggle is over and the objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic will be best achieved through exclusively peaceful political struggle. The RSM agree with this analysis and are fully supportive of the move to build a left wing party that has a clear objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic based on the principles of equality, justice, inclusion, human rights and dignity. It is within the above objective that the RSM opposed the Good Friday Agreement and continues to do so. We as a movement believe that the Six County State is not a viable political entity, which cannot be reformed and fitted into a flawed two State solution. The RSM has always aspired to the principle of the primacy of politics as espoused by Ta Power. The future struggles are political. We urge all comrades, members, volunteers and supporters to join the political struggle ahead with the same vigour, commitment and courage that was evident in our armed struggle against the British State. To para-phrase James Connolly ‘let us arise’, build a left political alternative in Ireland and support the struggle against global capitalism. Ultimately our allegiance is to the working class, onwards to victory. Posted in: Uncategorized | Comments Off The Power/O’Reilly Cumann IRSP will be holding a Wreath Laying Ceremony at 6:30p.m. Thursday 7th May, 2009 at the INLA Memorial Plaque in Friendly Street in the Markets area of Belfast. The ceremony is in memory of Vol. Jim Power who lost his life 28 years ago to the day, 7th May 1981.  Vol. Jim Power Posted in: Uncategorized | Comments Off Today in the twenty six counties the free state government, employers organisations, headed by IBEC (Irish Business and Employers Confederation) and the ICTU (Irish Congress of Trade Unions) unions are in what can only be described as a betrayal of the organised working class. By organised I mean those workers who are organised into trade unions. The agreement between the above trio is called “Partnership” which is basically an agreement which the employers can break at any time it suits them, as they have already done. The ICTU affiliated unions agreed with their “partners” last September a deal which was suppossed to last for three years. This deal was well below what any self respecting trade unionist would argue for, the exact details I have not got at hand but are not relevant to the point in question, an agreement which tied the hands of those sections of workers who wished to fight. Of course the employers and governmnet are delighted that they can immobilise a large section of the organised working class with the conivance of their leaders. Since last September the employers and government have broken this, at best pathetic, agreement as even this was not sufficient for them in their assault on the proleteriat. The trade unions had to respond to this, what can only be described as a betrayal, by balloting their members for a one day strike due to take place on March 30th 2009. One union, IMPACT, failed to get the two thirds majority needed to sanction the industrial action. They were one percent short of this suicidal figure. The two thirds rule is a liability and should be replaced by a simple majority. This was sufficient for the ICTU unions to return to the negotiating table and call the intended action off. This action had been mandated by the other ICTU affiliated unions but this tiny detail was conviniently forgotten or overlooked in their, the leaderships, hurry to get back in the employers good books. The ICTU union leaders were delighted to be back at the negotiating table. At this point it may be correct to explain what negotiating means, it does not mean the same as consultation which it appears many union chiefs have forgotten. Negotiation means going in with a militant plan to attain the best available deal appertaining to a given situation which under “Partnership” the ICTU union leadership failed to do. This “Partnership” was/is very much weighted towards the employers favour and ties the hands of any militant shop stewards movements. It is a case of the ICTU leadership plotting out a map of coexistence with the employers whose interests are poles apart from the union members they are suppossed to represent. The shop stewards and the local union shop is the backbone of any trade union and not those highly paid fat cats at the top. It is often very difficult to spot the difference between a trade union leader and the employers, not only because they dress similar which in itself is not a problem but when the language used is identical then there is a problem. Under “Partnership” the hands of the shop stewards and the rank and file union members are tied in a manner not dissimilar to handcuffing. “Partnership” has resulted with the union boses accepting that workers must realise a cut in living standards is inevitable to bail the capitalist system out of the mess the bourgeoisie have made of it. Due to incompetence on behalf of the employing classes. the bankers, property speculators, developers etc. the workers have to pay, and pay with the conivance of their union leaders. It is time for the shop stewards movements to reassert themselves and call lightening action over the heads of the official trade union leadership. However all is not lost. There is a breed of new unions slowly coming through most prominently led by the Independent Workers Union who are not shackled by “Partnership” simply because they are not affilliated to ICTU. ‘a group of Irish Trade Unionists, organised around the IWU, is convinced that organised labour as it is presently structured under the ICTU has lost its way. The leaders of the large, bureaucratic unions have become little more than an arm of management and the state. They often function to control workers rather than advance their interests’. These words from the IWU are vindicated by the actions of the ICTU leaders in negotiating/ being consulted within the terms of “Partnership”. As a member and activist of the IWU I am convinced this union will not go down the same avenue of betrayal. We follow in the footsteps of Connolly and Larkin and will continue to do so. Kevin Morley Irish Republican Socialist Party Branch Secretary Dublin Cumann. Posted in: Uncategorized | Comments Off |
The INLA and IRSP were formed in 1974 in order to create a 32 County Socialist Republic. In those 35 years military volunteers and political activists have fought with courage and honour and have struck at the heart of the British military and political machine in Ireland and in Britain. The INLA is a key constituency within the Republican Socialist Movement (RSM). The INLA recognised that its struggle was based upon two distinct phases: