The Socialist Unity Network
back
 

Socialist Unity

wants to hear from you.

Got a comment?

Why not email us with your thoughts?

Victory against YMCA –

But campaign against immigration slavery continues

John Nicholson

 

There can be victories in the struggle against immigration controls! But these can only come about through solidarity and collective action

 

The YMCA in Liverpool recently announced its willingness to participate in the immigration slavery scheme introduced by section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004.  Section 10 allows for housing and other support for certain refugees to be made conditional on undertaking “community services”.  These are refugees whose claim has been rejected by the Home Office  but are unable to return home because of circumstances beyond their control – because they are stateless or ill or (paradoxically in the case of a rejected asylum application) the country of return is too dangerous

 

Section 10 transforms refugees into slaves. It makes their labour compulsory as refusal to participate will mean deprivation of housing and other support. No One Is Illegal began a campaign against the YMCA. This was supported and lead by groups in Liverpool.

 

And the YMCA has now backed down. Victories can be won!

 

The struggle continues!

However the struggle against immigration slave labour continues. The YMCA in other cities may decide to collude in the scheme.  When the Act was being debated in the House of Lords, Lord Rooker encouraged voluntary sector groups to get involved. He also suggested that this  compulsory refugee labour could be used for the maintenance of the refugee’s own accommodation – which is a way local authorities and private companies can get otherwise unlettable properties updated for free.

 

Why the scheme should be opposed

* It is in breach of  section 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights – (prohibition of forced labour)

*  It is in breach of the 1930 Forced Labour Convention of the International Labour organisation to which the UK a signatory

* It offends all trade union principles – in particular the right to reject employment without suffering penalties. .

 

What you can do

* Ask your trade union branch to pass a resolution against section 10 and to notify the Home Secretary

* Be alert to any Home Office attempt to involve your or any other company of agency in the scheme

* Invite a speaker from No One Is Illegal to your trade union or any other relevant meeting.

Come to the No One is Illegal conference, June 25th, 12.30pm-6pm, Cross St Chapel, Cross St,  Manchester , UK

 

NO-ONE IS ILLEGAL www.noii.org.uk , email info@noii.org.uk   16 Wood St Bolton, BL1 1DY

 

Copy of above as a Word document:

http://www.asylumpolicy.info/thestrugglecontinues.doc


 

Response from Merseyside:

 

A scheme which would have forced failed asylum seekers to work in return for accommodation has been dropped.

The government pilot, due to start in Liverpool this summer, would have seen young asylum seekers doing community service before their deportation.

A YMCA spokesman said it did not think it was appropriate any more.

 

But Ed Murphy, chair of Merseyside Refugee Support Network, said he hoped the decision reflected national policy.

 

 "We are opposed to the whole government legislation which allows this slave labour to take place in the first place" Ed Murphy, Merseyside Refugee Support Network

The YMCA is expected to run a voluntary version of the scheme.

 

"There was concern about the compulsory nature of the project and we now no longer think that it is appropriate and would prefer it if the scheme was voluntary," said the YMCA spokesman.

 

"The project is only in the early stages of consultation and we will continue to consult local agencies about the pilot scheme."

 

Mr Murphy said he hoped the YMCA would not be running a compulsory scheme anywhere.

 

'Slave labour'
"We hope this decision has been taken on a national level and not just scrapped in Liverpool because of the opposition the YMCA has faced here.

 

"We are opposed to the whole government legislation which allows this slave labour to take place in the first place."

 

Under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004, failed asylum seekers are provided with accommodation if they are unable to return to their home countries for reasons beyond their control.

But the failed asylum seekers can be made to carry out "community activities" while awaiting deportation under section 10 of the same Act


 

BACKGROUND:

 

LETTER FROM “NASS” (HOME OFFICE) –

 

SECTION 10 OF THE ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION (TREATMENT OF CLAIMANTS, ETC.) ACT 2004 - COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES

You may be aware that the Home Office is now starting to implement section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, Etc.) Act 2004. Section 10 links section 4 support for failed asylum-seekers to taking part in community activities

Section 4 support - which consists of full-board accommodation - is available to failed asylum-seekers who have come to the end of the asylum process (including any appeals) but who, for reasons beyond their control, are currently unable to return home. This might be due to delays in arranging travel documentation, or because there is no viable route of return to their home country.

Section 10 will link this support to activities that are of benefit to the community, or certain sections of the community. We hope that the scheme will not only contribute to community cohesion, but also benefit the individuals concerned. As far possible, individuals will be matched with activities that allow them to build on existing skills or interests. Those who are unable to participate, for instance because of medical reasons or caring responsibilities, will not be expected to do so. There will also be a number of mechanisms in place to safeguard the welfare of the individuals - for example, the scheme will not apply to those under 18, and there will be a maximum limit on the number of hours of activities per week.

Our intention is to set up a pilot scheme in one area before rolling it out more widely, in order to design and test out the relevant processes. We have chosen YMCA England to deliver the first phase of the scheme. Based on the location of section 4 accommodation and where YMCA England are best able to deliver it, Ministers have decided to set up the first phase of the community activities scheme in Liverpool. Des Browne recently wrote to Sir David Henshaw, Chief Executive of Liverpool City Council, to inform him of the decision and seek the local authority's involvement in the scheme. A copy of the text of his letter is attached. He also wrote in similar terms to the relevant MPs at the time - Louise Ellman, Joe Benton, Peter Kilfoyle, Robert Wareing, Jane Kennedy and Maria Eagle.

We are now beginning detailed work with YMCA England to finalise a grant agreement and start setting up the scheme. However, before we go further, we are keen to build relationships with as many key agencies and organisations in Liverpool as possible. We want to ensure that the scheme is built up with the support of local partners, rather than imposed from the top down, and to that end we want to ensure that you and your colleagues are as fully involved as possible.

Gary Steptoe in the NASS North West office, who I understand you are meeting with on Friday 22 April, has kindly offered to set up a meeting so we can discuss this further. What I had envisaged was for myself and colleagues from YMCA England and NASS headquarters to come up to Liverpool, go through the details of the scheme, and discuss how best to keep you involved. I think that Gary will be in touch with you to canvass possible dates - I hope that we will be able to find a mutually convenient time. I understand that Gary will also be approaching other local partners, such as Merseyside Police and the Government Office for the North West. If there are other individuals or organisations who you think would like to be involved in such a meeting, then please let Gary or myself know.

I look forward to meeting you in due course, but in the meantime please feel free to get in touch if you have any questions (my contact details are at the top of the letter). For further information you can also visit the IND website:

http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/laws___policy/community_activities.html

Yours sincerely

By e-mail

Nick Poyntz

 

 

The YMCA Initial Decision:

 

That the Committee has considered the draft Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005.

 

"...I am pleased to inform the Committee that YMCA England will arrange and co-ordinate community activities in the first phase. That is the first public announcement of our partnership with YMCA in England in this regard, and we are in the process of finalising a grant agreement.

 

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200405/cmstand/deleg6/st050315/50315s01.htm

Prepared 16 March 2005

 

 


 

Some Personal Views:

 

1. As a teenager, I undertook a voluntary YMCA 'Work Experience Programme' (WEP) and have been a Community Service Volunteer (CSV), both being beneficial to me and I hope, the people worked with. However, I find it morally abhorrent and deeply offensive that the YMCA has chosen to engage in voluntary activities in the community, that are considered to be de-facto forced-labour, read slavery. Further, it also makes a mockery of the very idea of voluntary work and is, yet another, sad indicator of the quagmire charities and the ‘voluntary’ sector have put themselves in. Especially when they seek to collude with and become junior partners to the state’s enforced, read violent, asylum and immigration policies.

 

 

2.I think the way to tackle the YMCA is not to zap them, but to appeal to  them on the basis of their own mission statement, in which it says it stands  for:

 

 A worldwide fellowship based on the equal value of all  persons Respect and freedom for all, tolerance and understanding  between people of different opinions Active concern for the needs of the community United effort by Christians of different traditions

 

It would seem to me that there is a contradiction in the first two of these and being involved in the so-called community service, due to the coercive nature of the Home Office plan.

 

It is also an opportune time to write to the president, as he has only just taken up his post as of April 1st. I e-mailed him last week, so he will have had  at least one request for reconsideration to greet him on his first day at the  new job. If you want to send others, his contact details are:

 

Dr. John Tucker Mugabi_Sentamu_bishop@birmingham.anglican.org

(mailto:bishop@birmingham.anglican.org)

Dave Smith

The Boaz Trust

 


 

Contact details for UK, World & European YCMA's

 

World Alliance of YMCAs

http://www.ymca.int/

 

European Alliance of YMCAs

http://www.eay.org/

 

YMCA Scotland

http://www.ymcascotland.org/

 

National Council of YMCAs of Wales

http://ymca-wales.org/

 

YMCA Wales Community College

http://www.ymca-wales.ac.uk/

 

YMCA Canada Website

http://www.ymca.ca/

 

YMCA for the United States

http://www.ymca.net/

 

Y Care International are the international development agency of the YMCA movement in the UK and Ireland. We work in thirty countries in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. We work with local YMCAs and use their expertise to develop programmes that local people need.

contact

3-9 Southampton Row, London, WC1B 5HY, UK Map Tel:020 7421 3022 Fax:020 7421 3024 Web:http://www.ycare.org.uk

http://www.ymca.org.uk/pooled/profiles/BF_COMP/view.asp?Q=BF_COMP_21138

 


 

ACTIONS AND LEAFLETS:

 

 

Say no to Asylum Slavery

 

Demonstrate Tuesday 24th May 2005

 

12.15pm to 2.00pm

 

Called by Merseyside Asylum Rights Campaign

 

Liverpool Council Building

Millenium House

60 Victoria Street

Liverpool  L1. 6JQ

 

There will be a demonstration outside Millenium House against the Home Office consultation on Section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 (minimum support for compulsory 'community service'). The consultation is taking place regarding the YMCA agreement to participate in this dreadful 'practice' and sadly Liverpool YMCA has agreed to run a pilot scheme. We must all let the YMCA know that they should now say NO.

 

Campaign to  Stop the YMCA  turning Asylum-Seekers into Slave Labour

 
Background Legislation
Section 4 of the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act allows for minimum ("hard case") housing and other support for certain failed asylum seekers. This bare minimum is available where a failed asylum seeker is unable to return home because of circumstances beyond his or her control - for instance because they are stateless or ill or (paradoxically    in the case of a rejected asylum application) the country of return is too dangerous. However section 10 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 says that even this minimum will only be available on condition that the refugee undertakes compulsory "community service".

Slave Labour
This is a punishment hitherto reserved for convicted criminals. It is also a modern form of slavery. It is in breach of the 1930 Forced Labour Convention of the International Labour Organisation to which the UK is a signatory. The Convention defines forced labour as meaning "all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily". Asylum-seekers selected for the scheme will become homeless and destitute unless they perform the required community services/ labour. This cannot be classified as a "voluntary" agreement to work. Trade unions in particular should be alert to the use of such wageless labour. The present scheme is based on the compulsory giving of labour (just like the national dispersal of refugees is based on the compulsory movement of human beings, which is itself a form of servitude.)

Breach of Human Rights
Section 10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04.

In essence the criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks the section as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights (prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds of nationality).

The YMCA's collusion in the scheme Lord Rooker in the committee stage of the 2004 legislation made it clear that the government wants not only local authorities and the private sector but also the voluntary sector to participate in this scheme as slave masters. Hitherto only one voluntary agency has agreed to participate. This is the YMCA which has agreed to run a pilot scheme in Liverpool. This was made public by the YMCA in a statement of May 5 which attempts to justify the proposed slavery.

 * The first sentence of the statement says "YMCA England is the preferred provider" to deliver such a scheme. What does this mean? It is the language of corporate bodies tenders rather than an organisation fighting for the rights of asylum seekers.

* Historically all slave-owners seek to justify their role in showing that servitude somehow "helps" the slave. This was the position of the cotton growers of the Southern states of America at the time of the civil war - slavery being portrayed as a way that black plantation workers could be educated and their welfare met. The YMCA portrays section 10 as being benevolent and helpful to asylum-seekers

 

* The YMCA says that under the proposed scheme "No individual will be required to carry out any specific activity against their will." This is somewhat disingenuous as an asylum seeker within the scheme who refuses to carry out all proposed activities will automatically lose all support. This is clear from clause 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005.

 

* The statement says section 4 asylum-seekers should be allowed to enter into paid employment and that the YMCA will continue to be

"outspoken" on this and on other matters appertaining to refugees. We agree section 4 asylum-seekers should have the right to paid work and in fact think all asylum seekers should have this right. However there is an omission from the issues on which the YMCA is prepared to be "outspoken". At the moment those subject to immigration control are outside the welfare state. Entitlement to most benefits and services are dependant upon immigration status. Since 1999 asylum-seekers have been subject to a new poor law (administered by NASS - the National Asylum Support Service) based on compulsory dispersal and "maintenance" below income support level. "Hard case" support for   failed asylum seekers is even below these rates. Why does the YMCA not campaign for the restoration of full benefits and all other entitlements for asylum seekers and everyone else subject to immigration controls?

 

 

An issue of principle - No Collusion
The statement presents as positive that "The YMCA is also already working with a large number of failed asylum seekers through a contract with NASS to provide accommodation to around 150 section 4 recipients". This provision of (usually second rate) accommodation is not a benefit to refugees. This is because the YMCA is a party to evicting such section 4 recipients on withdrawal of support by NASS.

 If the voluntary sector (along with the private sector and local authorities) had refused to become involved with the poor law and dispersal scheme then these could not have been implemented. This leads to the basic issue of principle at stake here. Our position is that immigration controls cannot be sanitised, cannot be rendered "just", cannot be made "fair". All involvement on this basis only results in collusion - and in the present case in immigration slavery. It is ironic that Liverpool, the great port on which slavery rested historically, has been chosen for the pilot scheme.

 

What you can do?
Write to the following at the YMCA:

Richard Capie, Public Affairs Manager YMCA,
richard.capie@england.ymca.org.uk .

John Sentamu, National President of YMCA
Bishop@birmingham.anglican.org

Jeff Calvert, Chief Executive, Liverpool YMCA,
Jeff.Calvert@liverpoolymca.org.uk
Send copies of your letters to:

*Your local YMCA

*Anti--Slavery International info@antislavery.org

*International Labour Organisation

Europe@ilo.org  *The YMCA is an international organisation. Circulate this leaflet internationally

Come to the International
No One Is Illegal
conference
Saturday June 25th 1-6pm Cross St Chapel
Manchester city centre

 

Merseyside Asylum Rights Campaign

Adele Spiers

Adelespiers@yahoo.com

PO Box 283

Liverpool

L13 4WY

 

 

 


 

CAMPAIGN AGAINST IMMIGRATION SLAVERY

 

 

APPEAL TO TRADE UNIONS, LOCAL AUTHORITIES, AND VOLUNTARY SECTOR/ COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS AGAINST IMMIGRATION SLAVE LABOUR

 

Section 10 of Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 makes “hard case support” conditional on performance of community work.

This leaflet explains why trade unions, voluntary sector groups and local authorities need to make a statement denouncing this clause and refusing to take advantage of such forced labour.

 

A new section with severe implications was added at the last moment to the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004.  This gives the Home Secretary power to make regulations providing for the continuation of the provision of accommodation for a failed asylum seeker to be conditional upon her or his performance of community services.

 

Such “hard case support” is presently available under Section 4 of the 1999 Act in cases where a failed asylum seeker is unable to return home because of circumstances beyond his or her control – for instance because they are stateless or ill or (paradoxically in the case of a rejected asylum application) the country of return is too dangerous. Once regulations come into force this help will be dependant on what has hitherto been a punishment reserved for convicted criminals – namely obligatory community service

 

Already organisations are being asked to submit “expressions of interest” (ie. tenders) in order to participate as slave-masters.  Details can be found at http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/news/press_releases/asylum_and_immigration.html + http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ind/en/home/laws___policy/community_activities.html

 

Full benefits should be available to all irrespective of immigration status – and people seeking asylum should have the choice to work (it is ironic that all other people who are seeking asylum are forbidden to work). 

 

Section 10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04. In essence the criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks the section as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights (prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds of nationality).

 

Why trade unions must oppose this scheme

 

This legalisation of slave labour – transforming into slaves one of the most vulnerable and abused sections of our communities – is quite clearly something the labour movement must oppose. It is simply the logical conclusion of the super-exploitation of migrants, immigrants and refugees – a super exploitation that resulted in the deaths at Morecambe of the Chinese cockle-pickers.

 

 

Why local authorities must oppose this scheme

 

It gets worse. The new section has an expectation that local authorities will collude in the implementation of this forced labour scheme. It states that: “A local authority or other person may undertake to manage or participate in arrangements for community activities”.  This is a reminder of the old Poor Laws where parishes would contract in forced labour from the work-house.

 

Lord Rooker in the in the Committee stage of the 2004 Act said in the House of Lords that   community service might involve refugees “contributing to the upkeep or maintenance of their own accommodation”  This is a formula for the free repair of otherwise unlettable council (and voluntary sector or private  property)  to which asylum seekers are involuntarily “dispersed”– which can then be rented out at a profit once the slave is deported. In immigration newspeak Rooker called this “social cohesion”. It is more like social disintegration

 

 

Why the voluntary sector must oppose this scheme

 

It gets worse still. Lord Rooker also stated  “We would be happy to see the voluntary and community…sectors involved in this way…consultation should take place with…the National Council for Voluntary Organisations”.

.

The Home Office is trying to ensure that voluntary organisations, like other welfare and social service providers, become agents of internal immigration control – through the increasing link between immigration status and welfare entitlements. The new section with its imposition of forced (slave) labour is politically the logical consequence of this.

 

 

What to do!

 

(1) All organisations should write to the Home Secretary (Home Office, 50 Queen Anne’s Gate, London SW1H 9AT), to object to Section 10, to state that you will refuse to participate in it – and to make this correspondence public.

(2) Organisations should arrange meetings against the exploitation of undocumented labour and for the non-implementation of Section 10.

(3) Let’s develop this into a national campaign!

 

This leaflet has been produced by

: NO-ONE IS ILLEGAL www.noii.org.uk  16 Wood St Bolton, BL1 1DY

 


 

LETTER TO YMCA

No One Is Illegal c/o 16 WOOD ST, BOLTON, LANCS BLI IDU

Email  info@noii.org.uk

To: YMCA

(1)     Richard Capie

Public Affairs Manager YMCA

 richard.capie@england.ymca.org.uk


(2) The Right Reverend Dr. John Tucker Mugabi Sentamu
National President of YMCA

Bishop@birmingham.anglican.org
 
(3)Jeff Calvert,
Chief Executive, Liverpool YMCA

Jeff.Calvert@liverpoolymca.org.uk


 

Dear YMCA

 

Section 10 of Asylum and Immigration Act 2004 making “hard case support” under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act conditional on performance of involuntary community work.

 

We have written to you previously (without reply)  voicing our concern over the YMCA’s involvement in what can only be called  an “immigration slavery” scheme. We are still appalled by your agreement to allow Liverpool YMCA to “pilot” the scheme. Your statement of May 5th does nothing to reassure us. We would like to make the following points and raise the following questions. We await your response

 

(1) Historically all slave-owners and masters ultimately seek to justify their role in showing that servitude somehow “helps” the slave. This was the position of, for example, the cotton growers of the Southern states of America at the time of the civil war – slavery being portrayed as a way that black plantation workers could be educated and their welfare met. Your statement of May 5th likewise portrays section 10 as initiating a scheme that can be benevolent and helpful to asylum-seekers 

 

(2) In whatever way it is sanitised section 10 does construct a system of slavery for those asylum seekers subject to it  because they will be denied all support unless they agree to undertake community services.

 

(3) Section 10 has been condemned by the Joint Committee on Human Rights of the House of Lords/House of Commons in its Fourteenth Report of Session 2003-04. In essence the criticism is one of slave labour. In particular the report attacks the section as being in breach of Article 4(2) of the European Convention of Human Rights (prohibition of forced labour), of Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment) and of Article 14 (no discrimination on grounds of nationality).

 

(4) You say that under the proposed pilot scheme “No individual will be required to carry out any specific activity against their will” This is somewhat ingenuous as an asylum seeker within the scheme who refuses to carry out all proposed activities will automatically lose all support. This is clear from clause 4 of the Immigration and Asylum (Provision of Accommodation to Failed Asylum-Seekers) Regulations 2005

 

(5) What trade unions have you consulted as to the employment of wageless labour?

 

(6) We note that you say that section 4 asylum-seekers should be allowed to enter into paid employment and that you will continue to be “outspoken” on this and on  other matters appertaining to refugees. We  agree section 4 asylum-seekers should have the right to paid work and in fact think all asylum seekers should have this right. However we are concerned that there appears to be a deliberate omission from the issues on which you are prepared to be “outspoken”. This is the restoration of the right to all benefits and services for asylum-seekers. In other words no benefit or service should be linked to immigration status. This would also ensure the end of the forced dispersal scheme – which itself could correctly be described as being analogous to servitude.

 

(7) The first sentence of your statement  of May 5th justifying the pilot scheme says

“YMCA England is the preferred provider “ to deliver such a scheme”. What does this mean? It is the language of corporate bodies seeking tenders rather than an organisation fighting for the rights of asylum seekers.

 

(8) Your entering into this scheme undermines the whole concept of “voluntary” work. “Voluntary” work by its very name suggests the freely giving of services. The present scheme is based on the compulsory giving of labour (just like dispersal is the compulsory movement of human beings).

 

(9) You say and present as something positive that “The YMCA is also already working with a large number of failed asylum seekers through a contract with NASS to provide accommodation to around 150 section 4 recipients”. We do not necessarily consider this of benefit to refugees. For instance how many section 4 recipients have you evicted on withdrawal of section 4 support?  It is clear that if the voluntary sector (along with the private sector and local authorities) had refused to become involved with the dispersal scheme then the latter could not have been implemented. 

 

(10) This leads to the basic issue of principle at stake here. Our position is that immigration controls cannot be sanitised, cannot be rendered “just”, cannot be made “fair”. All involvement on this basis only results in collusion – and in the present case in immigration slavery.

 

We hope you will reconsider your position

Yours

No One Is Illegal

Copy sent to Anti-Slavery International email: info@antislavery.org


 

REFERENCES:

 

References, from www.asylumpolicy.info

 

Lead item: - 'Slave Labour Scheme, update'

 

Liverpool drops asylum work pilot

A scheme which would have forced failed asylum seekers to work in return for accommodation has been dropped.

31 May 2005

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/4597087.stm

 

'Slave Labour' Scheme for Failed Asylum Seekers Scrapped http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4628210

 

YMCA's 'slave labour' work scheme scrapped The project is only in the early stages of consultation and we will continue to consult local agencies about the pilot scheme ?

We hope this decision has been taken on a national level and not just scrapped in Liverpool because of the opposition the YMCA has faced here...

http://society.guardian.co.uk/asylumseekers/story/0,7991,1496222,00.html

 

Come to June 25th NOII Conference and anti-deportation rally to discuss next move on the forced labour scheme and ideas and practice in fighting immigration controls Saturday, June 25th, 12.15pm-6pm Cross St Chapel, Cross St, Manchester City Centre, two minutes walk from Albert Square, 15 minutes from Piccadilly station. Wheelchair accessible

More: PDF document

http://noii.trick.ca/internationalconferenceJune25th.pdf

 

[www.asylumpolicy.info] - 'The YMCA have dropped section 10'

 

June 2005

back

For Socialist Unity ~ For Internationalism ~ For Peace ~ For Justice ~ For Unity ~ For Socialism