21.11.1996

Homosexuals and hypocrisy

SL Kenning looks at latest developments in the Socialist Labour Party

Tony and Ann Goss were expelled from the Labour Party in 1987 on 15 charges of assault and threatening behaviour. They then proceeded to set themselves up as ‘Independent Labour Party’ councillors. Their record was a disgrace. Let us highlight one very relevant area - the democratic rights of homosexuals.

In 1990 the Southwark Labour council adopted a somewhat sympathetic stance towards Michael Masson - a gay man who wanted to become a foster parent. Ann Goss was outraged.

She publicly accused Masson of being “totally selfish”. It was clear to Mrs Goss “that Mr Masson has not given a thought for what the child he fosters will have to put up with in the real world”. Other children would tease and bully.

Instead of taking a principled stand and explaining that sexual orientation should not be a criteria for judging the suitability of people volunteering to foster, she appealed to backward prejudices. In the name of her and her husband’s ‘Independent Labour Party’ she demanded that lesbians, gay men and bisexuals be treated as second class citizens:

“Any child who is no longer with their natural parents, for whatever reason, has enough on their plate without being fostered into a homosexual household.”

Naturally Southwark council did not escape censure either. It was “time they started listening to ordinary people and stopped playing god with our children’s lives” (Letter South London Press May 20 1990).

The implication is clear. The bigotry unmistakable. Same sex activity and “ordinary people” are two categories which stand as polar opposites. Obviously for Ann Goss “ordinary people” are by definition 100% heterosexual.

It is against this background that latest developments in the SLP have to be considered.

Southwark SLP councillor Ian Driver - who is openly bisexual - has been angrily complaining about a “vicious homophobic whispering campaign” against him. The names of Tony and Ann Goss feature prominently. I personally have heard of their supporters in North and South London describing comrade Driver as a “dirty puff” and a “nonce”.

Of course now Tony Goss is the creature of comrade Sikorski and his Fourth International Supporters Caucus. With the backing of Fisc he was recently appointed “acting” London election agent. Not surprisingly therefore comrade Sikorski has quickly sprung to his defence. Addressing comrade Driver in his position as general secretary, he refused to even consider the suggestion of one of his own being anti-homosexual. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation/preference is, you see, “explicitly and totally opposed” in clause four of our so-called ‘constitution’ - an arbitrarily imposed ‘constitution’ which, comrade Sikorski actually claims, “the May 1996 Congress [sic] of the SLP agreed [sic] should be immediately effective”.

Like an emperor Nero comrade Sikorski deviously tries to shift the blame - presumably onto the communists. “I do feel that such rumours may well be being put about by individuals who perhaps do not have the best interests of the Party at heart” (Letter to Ian Driver, November 11 1996).

In backing the Gosses, comrade Sikorski not only violates the Scargill ‘constitution’. He violates the NEC’s policy statement, ‘Sexual preference and orientation’. It rightly demands comprehensive equality and lambastes those who turn “a blind eye” to the abuse, harassment and violence faced by lesbians, gay men and bisexuals (Socialist Labour - our policies Doncaster August 1996, p33).

Not for the first time - and, I am sure, not for the last - I accuse comrade Sikorski of hypocrisy.

Camden made ‘completely ineffective’

Patrick Sikorski issued a general secretary’s edict this month declaring the “decisions” of Camden SLP branch in North London “completely ineffective”. Why has such a draconian measure been taken? What has Camden SLP been doing that makes it so dangerous? Camden SLP welcomes its former branch secretary, John Bridge, to meetings.

According to comrade Sikorski, his “presence and active role in the meeting render its decisions completely ineffective” (Letter, November 12 1996). Comrade Bridge had been elected unopposed in August 1996. However comrade Bridge was almost immediately voided by the NEC - charged with being “a member or supporter of the Communist Party of Great Britain. There was no warning, no appeal, no discussion.

Such a McCarthyite attack was not simply aimed at one individual. It is not that our general secretary is obsessed with persecuting comrade Bridge. Anti-communist witch hunting is a system. As shown by his making Camden branch “completely ineffective”, it is an integral part of a concerted campaign to rob all SLP members of their democratic rights. No member, no branch, no section is safe.

There must be a storm of protest against the voiding of comrade Bridge and the Sikorski edict against Camden branch. Write or fax resolutions to the NEC. Invite comrade Bridge to your SLP meeting. Invite Camden SLP officers.

SE London disrupted

Following the vote to divide the South London membership into South East and South West branches, the Fiscites and their allies have done their best to wreck things. Foolishly, a majority of comrades, including self-styled Bolsheviks, trusted former secretary Helen Drummond to oversee an orderly transition. The minority who wanted an AGM and firm democratic control over reorganisation have been proved correct.

A two-pronged approach has been employed by Fisc and its allies. On the one hand, micro-breakaways. As previously reported here, having lost the unified South London branch, Tony and Ann Goss, and Helen Drummond set up their own “constitutionally recognised” Peckham branch. On the other hand, there is disruption. That was seen in full measure at the first meeting of the South East London branch meeting on November 12.

There were only some 15 comrades present at South Bank University students’ union. Item one on the agenda was correspondence. SLP councillor Ian Driver had written complaining about the small-minded and sectarian conduct of Drummond and the Gosses. NEC member Terry Dunne was present and he did not want any discussion on that. Like a petty dictator he insisted that the branch had no right to even consider the letter sent to it by comrade Driver. Such issues are for the NEC alone, he barked.

However, when challenged, comrade Dunne suddenly decided that the branch was “unconstitutional”. Our so-called ‘constitution’ makes provision only for branches based on constituency boundaries. I have it in writing that our general secretary actually believes all “other interim branch formations are fine as long as they are based on full consent of all the members concerned” (Letter, November l2). In other words one ‘non-consenting’ individual can close a branch. The fact that the NEC is itself unconstitutional according to the provisions of the Scargill ‘constitution’ is of course never mentioned by such people.

Having elected himself a ‘nonconsenting’ individual, Dunne tried to stop anyone else speaking. For 30 minutes he interrupted, insulted and attempted to browbeat. In the end he walked out, followed by sidekick Denise Bishop (now of North London) and, 15 minutes later, Brian McKeon. As the last named comrade departed, he castigated the meeting because it was being run by members with “a CPGB and SWP agenda”.

Those remaining unanimously agreed to establish the South East London branch.

Strange alliance

I will not mention names, time, place or branch - the witch hunt dictates circumspection. But mention the politics I must. For we see before us a strange alliance cohere.

The International Bolshevik Tendency, Workers Power and supporters of the wondrously misnamed Economic and Philosophical Science Review recently united in a solid voting bloc. What brought these comrades together? Paradoxical though it may appear, it is a determination not to support any united and organised left opposition in the SLP.

The IBT wants to be the next Fisc and is committed to a strategy of deep entryism. Workers Power, as usual, is at sixes and sevens: outside the SLP it calls for a blanket Labour vote; inside it is not sure what to do. As to the EPSR, its founder-editor now espouses the full blown liquidationism immanent in any mechanical, rose-tinted world view.

Having requested and then apparently declined CPGB membership - it required disciplined work, without the cash payments he felt entitled to - he told his little band of followers that the best way to promote their politics is to chat informally in pubs. Your round, IBT and Workers Power.