18.07.1996
Charter for socialist change
Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance held a conference last Saturday to agree a Charter for socialist change. Dave Nellist from Coventry Militant Labour and Ann Lynch from the Scottish Socialist Alliance (a member of Scottish Militant Labour) were the speakers in an event to create the kind of agreement and structures developed in Scotland.
The main organisations present were Socialist Outlook and Militant Labour, with a scattering of disillusioned Labour Party members and one or two SLPers. Incidentally Manchester SLP members are actually affiliated to the Socialist Alliance and were represented on that day by NEC member Phil Griffin, who took an active part in discussions. The stance of Phil on this matter is to be applauded but is in marked contrast to other NEC members, such as Carolyn Sikorski, who warned SLPers in London not to have anything to do with the alliances and not even to talk to alliance members like myself.
Phil’s non-sectarian and open attitude on this question shows that perhaps it is not, as rumoured, an expellable offence to be a member of an alliance as well as the SLP. This should give others, particularly in Scotland, encouragement. If they can do it in Manchester, why not everywhere?
Speaking to Socialist Outlook members, I soon discovered that there was another agenda operating, particularly for them. The United Secretariat of the Fourth International, to which they belong, and ML are currently in unity discussions. Internationally they both agree on the formation of a federal party.
Therefore Socialist Outlook members in Britain have been told to talk and work with ML with a view to fusion. All very positive in terms of the recognition of the need for regroupment, but where is the debate? Flicking through the pages of their respective papers gives you no idea of what is happening behind the scenes.
Socialist Outlook members told me that agreement on the charter on Saturday was a precursor to unity. That at least explained the pages and pages of amendments being tabled by Socialist Outlook members and their exasperation at losing most of the votes on policy. Some very absurd formulations were being reached, particularly on the question of Ireland, in an attempt to arbitrarily bridge the gap between very different political approaches and beliefs. Socialist Outlook lost the vote in favour of support for the Labour Party - naturally enough - but it was difficult for them to accept. Given their long-term allegiance to such views, they cannot be given up in an afternoon.
Therefore the understandable fear of Socialist Outlook members is that as a minority in ML they will have to liquidate their politics. So members cannot have gained much hope from the example of Phil Hearse, former editor of the Socialist Outlook journal, who defected to ML and now writes regularly in its publications. He never explained his political conversion or argued out his old views in public. They are right to be concerned. Unity on the basis that is currently being pursued is simply a bureaucratic lash-up with the minority being forced to ditch their views.
If this new move towards regroupment is to mean anything for the class this must change. Discussion must be had out openly, in the way that the Communist Party has done with both the Revolutionary Democratic Group and Open Polemic. The class must be able to see the debate towards the formation of organisations which seek to lead them. Telling them afterwards is like saying that the event does not concern them.
ML says it wants to build a democratic party of the class with the freedom of tendencies and the open exchange of views. They have to prove they mean that, not simply say it. The discussion towards fusion with Socialist Outlook must be published with plenty of room for debate and with guarantees for the minority that they can continue to put their views, even if they lose the vote. Both the majority and the minority have a duty to the class to insist on this.
Anne Murphy