Fraser Young and Robbie Thomson, 3.3.14
Robbie said he had been involved in coordinating Edinburgh
schools for East of Scotland RIC. It is hard to get organised in schools. It is
important to distance ourselves from Better Together and Yes Scotland. RIC
needs to bring in young speakers.
Fraser said that headteachers were afraid to allow meetings
to go ahead for fear of complaints particularly from parents. If debates go
ahead they are usually confined to internal school speakers. Eddie had
organised a debate in Musselburgh Grammar. Voter registration is important for
involving young people. There is a need for more RIC events. The new media is
important. Twitter is already dominated by ‘Yes’ Scotland.
The meeting then was organised into pairs to discuss the issue. This
was followed by a Report Back.
Aly, Robbie and Fraser had thought
that issues that affect young people should be raised in the campaign such as
low youth wages, poverty and lack of youth representation. The obstacles to
getting into schools also needed to be addressed.
Allan and Pat, who are both ex-teachers, pointed out that
there was a RIC-supporting candidate in the EIS Vice-Presidential campaign. The
local EIS could be asked to back speakers going into schools. The schools were
also supposed to be promoting ‘citizenship’. This was an opportunity to put
pressure on the local council, especially as it is run by an SNP/Labour
coalition. If RIC could produce a national package of material for schools and
colleges this would be useful when pushing for debates.
Aisha and Chris emphasised the importance of the anti-racist
demonstration in Glasgow on March 22nd. Aisha said that she had been
invited into Holyrood High by a history teacher to speak after she had visited
Auschwitz. Many young people were very suspicious of the mainstream parties.
They would probably come to the forthcoming demonstration against the Tory
Conference in Edinburgh.
Eddie and Willy said that all the campaigns had to be united
together. The issues of democracy and citizenship needed to be raised in
schools. Willie also sad that those adults at the RIC conference needed to talk
to their children.
Amie and Ian said head teachers would use the excuse that
Better Together would not provide speakers to prevent debate. Better Together
did not want democratic discussion. It was important to cover both schools and
colleges. Amie thought that a gig would be a good idea to attract young people.
Jerome from The Netherlands and Marisa from Greece mentioned
the international dimension. Marisa emphasised the importance of the fight
against Golden Dawn. Jerome pointed out how the SSP had been leafleting in
support of immigrants to counter the racist poison of UKIP and the Tories. The
SNP’s White Paper was more tolerant.
Irene and Kirsty talked about their own children. At her work
Irene organised social events, especially traditional music, for the elderly,
with young musicians. It was possible to raise the issue of independence at
such events. Kirsty added that she was not aware that Better Together existed
in Leith.
Judy and Bob thought it was important that RIC conducted some
research to find out why there were still so many young people prepared to vote
‘No’.
David and Sophia asked how do we ensure that young people are
on the electoral register.
Andy and Alice said that formal meetings are scary for young
people. There is a need to get across what independence would mean for young
people. Young people needed to take a lead. Alice added that too often young
people were told what to think, not how to think. RIC needed to be more ‘cool’
with people speaking at young people’s level. She also said it was important to
talk to young people at work as well as in the schools and colleges.
Robbie replied by saying there was still a problem with a
‘Yes’ vote being seen as a vote for the SNP. The ‘No’ vote has three official
backing parties – Tories, Lib-Dems and Labour. Furthermore, the SNP are the
only force given any attention in the media. Young people often think that the
SNP are making false promises. Others just don’t care because of their
alienation from the political process.
This Report Back was followed by a general Discussion.
Kirsten emphasised how he ‘No’ campaign resort to quick
soundbytes which, even when quite obviously exaggerated or untrue, still had an
impact. Not everybody follows Facebook or Twitter.
Alice said that getting a ‘Yes’ vote was not enough. RIC
needed to advance its own radical agenda.
Willy said it was not necessarily the age of the speaker that
was important, but what they said. He had spoken recently at a college meeting
of 300, and was well received. Tony Benn was able to speak to old and young
people. It was important to make sure that young people were more involved, but
both younger and older people have an interest in changing the world.
Andy pointed out how well young speakers like Cat Boyd and
Saffron Dickson were received at the RIC conference. They had influence because
they were young.
Kirsten said she was very impressed by the number of young
people at the RIC conference.
Chris said that presentation is important. However, it was
radical politics that had the widest appeal. Young people were involved in the
occupation of Labour’s Millbank HQ during the 2011 student protests and the
riots of the same year. He said that Edinburgh College lecturers were prepared
to allow ‘Yes’ speakers to address them.
Amie said there is an Edinburgh University ‘Yes’ campaign.
However, there needed to be wider forums specifically for young people.
Kirsten suggested that where there was no ‘No’ speaker
prepared to debate, a ‘Yes’ speaker could take on that role. This was in the
best tradition of university debating.
Robert agreed about the need to radicalise the campaign, but
the problem was how to get accepted in the first place.
Pat said that young people are as diverse as older people.
She knew a young person who had attended RIC conference who had been impressed
by Saffron. She now felt a lot more confident in arguing her case.
Alice said that there was a Third Sector ‘Yes’ campaign. This
involved youth workers so it would be a good idea to approach them.
Willy said that community workers in North Edinburgh had
already been involved in promoting debate. There have been discussions in
Broughton and Craigroyston schools.
Allan emphasised that one aspect of our radical politics was
an emphasis on democracy and citizenship. The council and school authorities
should be challenged over the bureaucratic stifling of debate and their
continued acceptance of young people being subjects not citizens. He also
wondered if a present day equivalent of ‘Rock Against Racism’ could not be
organised, given the many musicians who support independence.
Amie asked how do young people currently organise within RIC.
Fraser said that Liam McLaughlin is the Scottish RIC
organiser and there was a national blog.
Judy emphasised the need to have a meeting of young RIC
member and contacts.
Simon said that young people are the most important
constituency, since it is their future. Therefore it was important to get into
every school in the city. Older people can offer guidance. Due to poor
education in the schools, there is little knowledge of inspirational figures like
John Muir. Young people don’t know about plays like The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil.
Decisions taken
1. Fraser and Robbie to organise a RIC meeting
specifically for young people.
2. Edinburgh branch to contact Edinburgh
College to take part in a debate.
3. Edinburgh branch to produce a leaflet for
the demo at the Tory Party conference.
Edinburgh branch to
suggest at the next RIC National Forum (March 29th) that the organisation
produce a national package, which can be used in schools and colleges
No comments:
Post a Comment