WeeklyWorker

13.12.2007

Rank and file reassured

Dave Vincent, secretary of the Greater Manchester ministry of justice PCS branch, reports on the December 8 conference of PCS Left Unity

There were about 50 at the start of the national conference in Manchester of the Public and Commercial Services Union's Left Unity group, rising to about 80 as the day went on. Not surprisingly, with the absence of the breakaway Independent Left, there was very little dissent. And if proceedings had not started an hour late, there might have been deeper discussion on some issues.

Overall, it was quite a fraternal affair and the dominant Socialist Party will have been very happy with proceedings, as all major issues went its way. There again, since none of the motions submitted (mainly from SP members) were in opposition to one another, this outcome was hardly surprising. General secretary Mark Serwotka was scheduled to appear, but could not make it, so assistant general secretary Chris Baugh (SP) spoke in his place.

The agenda as I described last week (Weekly Worker December 6) was supplemented by emergency motions on the national PCS campaign against job cuts, redundancies and the two percent pay limit. However, these did not change the basic stance - that the (SP-dominated) national executive is right in the way it has conducted the campaign so far. The PCS-promoted public sector unity over pay is now looking rather thin - apart from the National Union of Teachers the remaining unions have settled their claims and pulled out. More than once it was stated that the problem lies with those unions affiliated to the Labour Party, whose leaders do not want to upset Gordon Brown.

Despite this, the leadership has convinced ministers, it was claimed, that the PCS fightback is not going to go away and the most recent consultative ballot held in the autumn still commands as much support from PCS members as previously. Indeed, this had forced the government/treasury to the negotiating table for a series of "meaningful talks", in contrast to the earlier stance of 'The PCS has got itself into this mess and we're not going to bale them out'.

When senior NEC members adopt such an upbeat tone and assure us that the national campaign is about to deliver, how can anyone be sceptical - especially when we are told that if compulsory redundancy notices are issued the suspended strike action will be back on? There is still no talk of either all-out or paid selective action, however.

In this context it is worth pointing out that, when ministry of justice PCS members previously called for paid selective action as part of their unsuccessful campaign to defeat the introduction of regional pay, they were refused by the NEC, because 'No single department can beat the government'. However, department for work and pensions members were given the go-ahead for another two days of unpaid strike action on December 6 and 7.

Can further national days of strike action win real concessions, as the left-led NEC seems to be saying? Do the talks represent a sufficient breakthrough to justify "pausing" (the word 'suspending' is not approved) strike action or is the government simply stringing the NEC along until events move its way and PCS can be further isolated? Time will soon tell.

Who's left?

As I noted last week, the 22 Left Unity candidates for next spring's NEC elections had already been determined by the SP on the assumption that the pact with the PCS Democrats would be renewed on Saturday. This pact, under the name of 'Democracy Alliance', has been in operation for five years and has certainly been an electoral success. The right wing was finally removed from power and then kept out. Under its terms approximately 65% of candidates on the common slate are allocated to Left Unity, with the remaining 35% going to the PCS Democrats, ensuring continued overall left control of the NEC.

It was stated that the pact is a tactic, not a principle, and that no compromises had been involved in agreeing a joint platform. It remains the case, we are warned, that the major rightwing group, '4 the Members', is consistently a very close runner-up to the Democracy Alliance.

Nevertheless, there were still questions asked about the political basis of the pact, about the degree of support the PCS Democrats deliver, and about what our common values are. Criticisms were also made of the PCS Democrats' method of operating at departmental level.

However, conference overwhelmingly approved continuation of the pact for the 2008 NEC elections. But, to the displeasure of the top table, it also voted for a review of the arrangement.

There was criticism of the Independent Left for creating disunity, splitting the left vote and allowing the right the possibility of regaining control of the NEC. Although that did not happen in 2007, when IL did badly and Left Unity actually increased its vote, things may not go so well for LU in 2008. Independent Left is widely regarded as irresponsible and reckless amongst Left Unity comrades and one went so far as to say that IL seems "determined to break the national campaign".

PC PCS

It was admitted that the question of reserved seats on the NEC (currently there are two for black members, but none for other groups) is the subject of strong feelings for and against, with doubts being expressed that this is not the best way to deal with under-representation.

Of the four motions on this question, one merely proposed a discussion (rather than enforcement) of the whole question of reserved seats, with the aim of "finding a positive way forward". However, a motion favouring additional reserved seats for other groups (undefined and objected to accordingly by some - eg, are we talking of faith groups, as well as the usual range of women, LGBT, etc?) was still carried, showing that symbolic gestures over clear thinking can still win the day. Also agreed was a motion calling for more regional forums for black members.

Thankfully, however, a call for rigid demographic proportionality of groups according to their make-up amongst the overall PCS membership to be enforced for all Left Unity slates was defeated. Common sense prevailed, when it was pointed out that some candidates will cover two or more of the groups in question: ie, a black disabled male, a white gay female, and so on. How on earth could we work it out?

Hopi support

Motions calling for Left Unity to work with others, such as Organising for Fighting Unions, the National Shop Stewards Network, Public Service, Not Private Profit, etc, were carried, as was one demanding a "campaign for all trade unions to scrap their donations to the New Labour government" (yes, I know it should have stated 'Labour Party') despite an objection from a leading Morning Star supporter. One speaker said, to loud applause, that Unison had donated £3 million to Labour, the TGWU £6 million and Amicus £10 million - monies that could have funded united industrial action and hardship funds.

There were two motions condemning the 'war on terror', the occupation of Iraq and the threatened war on Iran. Both were carried, including one that welcomed the formation of Hands Off the People of Iran. However, this was opposed by three Socialist Workers Party comrades, who condemned Hopi's public criticism of the theocratic regime and claimed the campaign was set up in opposition to the Stop the War Coalition (although they admitted that when Hopi applied to affiliate to the STWC it had been refused). I got up to state, as the person who had originally drafted and successfully proposed the motion that affiliated PCS to STWC, that I had no problem with Hopi either.

Despite such areas of disagreement it was a calm and pretty united conference, with the comparatively small PCS being proclaimed as the union with the greatest number of leftwing activists. This was a way of reassuring the Socialist Party rank and file that the 'political' education of ordinary members via such questions as the national campaign and its refusal to bow down before the Labour government was reaping dividends, thanks to SP leadership.