I'll have a shot at answering a few of Stephen's questions, although I don't claim to be an expert on any of them.

"What are the relations between union officials and rank and file workers?"

That depends entirely on the union and the officials in question. I remember reading Jock Barnes (leader of the wharfies union in '51) memoirs, and how he talked about how the WWU used to have meetings every months that all the members would turn up to, they would discuss the issues of the day and would vote on them accordingly, and this is how union policy was formed. Nothing quite like that exists at Tramways at the moment, and Nick can't just wave his magic wand and make it happen overnight, but what he can do is consistently strughgle to defend the interests of the bus workers and to involve them in the democratic process as much as possible and to mobilise the workers in his union on a militant, class struggle basis. Being elected to a position like the one he now holds opens up a lot of opportunties to do that that don't exist as a grass roots member, and gives you the ability to actually shape and implement policy that you otherwise can't. At the very least there will be a culture that is much more receptive to radical ideas in Tramways with Nick at the top than there would have been had the President been your typical union bearucrat.

"Are union officials still part of the working class? If not where not they fit in the class structures of capitalism?"

Something of a loaded question. Nick will continue to work as a bus driver as President - he won't be sitting in a plush office paid for by union dues. Nick will continue to sell his labour-power to the capitalist class, and will remain very much a worker. As to the question of union officals in the abstract, I think that depends on the union official in question and the precise role they play.

"How much agency can a radical really have as a union official in a modern union? "

Depends on the union (I know I'm saying that a lot, but discussion of these issues have to be based on concrete reality, not totally abstract theory that due to it's lack of any links with reality degenerates all too easily into dogmatism and petty sectarian bullshit). The EPMU, for example, actually has a clause that says officials can only contest elections on a communist platform with express permission of the Exec. However, other unions are much more open to radical ideas. WP comrades have done a lot of good work within Unite, and comrades who work as organisers have actually come into contact with and recruited low paid, working class people to revolutionary politics. Involvement in unions, including running for elections and holding positions, is an important aspect of our engagement with the working class.

"Why is a small, but growing, number of radicals taking up official positions in unions, yet we have not seen any increase in radicalism across the working class as a whole?"

There are less than two dozen revolutionaries holding union positions throughout the country, and as far as I'm aware Nick's role as President is the only one that could truly be called a leadership role. It's no wonder that we havnt seen a mass surge in class struggle as a result of this! And the resurgence of class struggle is a much more dialectical process than this - it doesn't happen just because a whole lof of Bolshie union officials go and tell the workers they should go on strike and start reading Capital! It doesn't work that way. Subjective efforts of revolutionaries in working class struggles (including the union movement) is a factor in building up class struggle, and is the defining factor that can push the class consciousness over the edge from a "trade union consciousness" to a revolutionary one. But the objective, material conditions also have to change for there to be a major resurgence in class struggle, and with the small and weak nature of the far left in NZ today there's only so much we can do. If you were truly interested in promoting working class militancy, Stephen, you'd be applauding the fact that blue collar bus workers just elected a revolutionary communist as their union President! Instead, you snipe at him and whinge about how he is "bragging" and "egotistical". This is a VICTORY, albeit a small one, for both our anti-capitalist movement and the working class as a whole, and you're denigration of it doesn't say much for you're dedication to either.

"Can union officials help build democracy or can it only came from rank and file members? "

You're not asking questions here Stephen - you're pushing an anti-leadership agenda of your own. At least be open about that.

Of course union officials can help to build up democracy in the union. Nick has been democratically elected by his co-workers, first to the negotiations comittee between the union and the bosses, and now the role of union President. Considering his relatively short time on the site, ths shows how quickly he has won the workers confidence in him personally, and also his politics, which he has been completely open about.

Nick was, is and will continue to be a rank and file member who drives a bus in Wellington. He will also be the President of the union, and a leader of the union's members, who cast their rank and file votes in favour of him.

We should all be welcoming this news as a victory, and a very positive development. Wait until Nick actually does sell out and become a despicable class enemy (that's what union leaders do right :D) before you condemn him as one.