21.03.1996

The SLP left

Party notes

The reports reaching us of the internal meetings of the Socialist Labour Party confirm a number of things.

First, that the membership of the SLP is significantly to the left of the self-appointed steering committee. While we would have criticisms of some of the positions advanced by the membership at the recent policy conference in London for instance, there is no doubt that they were edging their way towards a revolutionary stance of some sort.

Second, the leadership is clearly aware of this and is worried by it. It has already moved to restrict the democracy of the fledgling party and its membership. It is acting with the spurious authority of a Scargill-inspired constitution that is not yet even in force. It is crudely making up the rules as it goes along.

Third, the leadership is extremely weak, both politically and organisationally. Politically, there has still not been one authoritative extended programmatic statement from any member of the provisional leadership of the party. The only coherent document so far has been the draft constitution framed by lawyers to restrict entry into the new party (and which, ironically, sections of the leadership now actually want to revise).

Organisationally, it is quite clear that the clique attempting to frame the new movement has no cadre to actually implement its politics. The appearance of the likes of Caroline or Pat Sikorski, Brian Heron or Bob Crow at practically every meeting - at whatever level in the organisation - is hardly indicative of its confidence and organisational strength.

Under these circumstances, we believe the left in the SLP should not be afraid to flex its muscles. Convened meetings of the SLP membership have democratic rights.

Unless the left actually uses its majority, then the SLP will be deformed by this leadership. Of course, we are in no way advocating civil war in the new organisation. But the project of building a genuine party of the working class is not the property of a handful of people who have installed themselves at the head of this important new development. Either they must be its servants, or they should step aside.

There is no reason for the left not to press home its advantage. The right of the SLP is in a minority and the leadership clique is in an extreme minority. Comrades must start to raise not simply verbal objections to the bureaucratic shenanigans of the leadership. They must formulate objections into resolutions, take votes and get on with the work of building the new party.

The role of the Weekly Worker in all of this is key. We must ensure that the paper becomes the paper of the revolutionary elements of the party. The paper can publicise infringements of party democracy, give coherence to groups and trends within the party, provide a vital platform for the left to debate and clarify its own position and - of course - it can organise forces on the ground.

Given the anti-democratic atmosphere this provisional SLP steering committee is trying to create, comrades who sympathise with our paper must of course be cautious. Its distribution to useful contacts can be handled from Centre if politically sensitive. The key thing is that it gets into the right hands and that its ideas start to be discussed. That is the real danger to those who would turn the SLP into their personal property.

Mark Fischer
National Organiser