I understand where you are coming from. Maybe I’m just more cynical. I don’t think that a strategy of trying to convert cheap labour into (expensive) Union Labour will work in the main.

I note that Germany and France protected their home workforce with restrictions on migrant Labour. Our government didn’t and it is a matter of public record that they hugely underestimated how many people would want to come and work here. If France and Germany had taken more of a share of the A8 workers I would not (personally) have taken such a stance against migrant workers. As it is because of the distortion created by differing national policies we got the short end again. Sorry if pointing this out is seen as impolite but this huge increase in labour supply in a short period has kept down wages. The established Unions playing catch-up isn’t going to do any good. By the time they have recruited significant numbers (presuming they can) the issue will have moved on or become irrelevant.

The bottom line is that companies work for their share-holders and don’t take wider social considerations into account (despite some window-dressing). Ultimately the aim of workers should be to take control of companies through Trusts or Co-operatives (my personal opinion).

Additionally, I don’t believe that the BNP are seeking to create a ‘front group’. There position is far more complex in this case. They see the value of an independent Union which treats their members fairly and campaigns for the interests of workers in this country.

Others are joining and don’t seem to be put-off in the way you predict. In particular we are attracting recruits from ethnic minority backgrounds. I have taken a personal interest in encouraging this.

As far as migrant workers are concerned I wrote an FAQ for the Union website on this subject. It specifically answered the point that seems to be being made here ‘Why don’t we just recruit them?’

Let me quote (myself!):-

“We feel that this policy is unlikely to succeed. It is difficult to persuade the new migrant workers of the benefits of union membership. Many Unions have problems recruiting workers generally but migrants pose a particular problem for the following reasons: -

First, they know that if they lose their job before they have completed the 12 months qualification period for any kind of rights or benefits, they often have to go back home. During this 12-month period what a Union can do for them is also limited.

Second, half of all registered workers say they do not intend to stay in the country for more than two years. These workers are likely to want to earn money, send it back and go.

Third, 49% of those registered are in casual jobs, often as agency temps. Agency temps do not have full employment rights.

Fourth, the main advantage to employers in hiring such labour is that it is cheap. By joining a Union and asking for higher rates migrant workers are losing their main selling point.

In Construction an estimated 10 per cent of all workers are A8 migrants. UCATT have recognised the negative effects of this: “every time workers on union-negotiated rates were laid off in favour of low-paid migrant workers it was a propaganda gift to the BNP” (Willie Whalen - Northern Region). Yet there is little evidence that their policy of attempting to recruit migrants has substantially countered or even affected these trends.”

I’m happy to debate this issue as well as the pathetic response to the assault on our pensions and off-shoring. Let people hear the arguments and decide where their best interests lie.