27.02.1997

Contesting Brent East

Stan Keable replies to Arthur Scargill’s claim in the Morning Star that he is not an SLP member

February 16 1997

I am writing to express the dismay of Brent SLP at your statements reported on February 3 in the Morning Star - a journal which is hostile to our party and urges its readers to vote Labour - that the SLP “has never intended to contest and will not contest London’s Brent East constituency in the general election”, and that “the person named as the SLP candidate [ie myself] ... is not a member of our party”. If this report is true, then we object that such decisions made by an individual, even the general secretary, are illegitimate and harmful to the party.

The decision of the Brent East CSLP to contest the general election was taken in line with the current struggle in the SLP to raise 100 candidates and to oppose all who stand on a Blairite manifesto. If the left wing of the Labour Party is to be won over to the SLP, it seems to us especially important to unmask those with socialist pretensions, like ‘Red Ken’ Livingstone, who act as a leftwing fig leaf for Tony Blair’s capitalism. The idea that the SLP “has never intended” to stand against such people is contrary to SLP policy, as determined by the National Executive Committee. SLP policy cannot be overturned at the whim of any individual officer of the party.

It was the unanimous decision of the National Executive Committee at its August 13th 1996 meeting that any constituency party which wishes to contest in any parliamentary constituency in addition to those already determined by the party shall be able to do so subject to the agreement of the NEC”, and that the selection of a candidate “shall be the exclusive responsibility of the constituency party concerned” (Socialist Labour Information August 30 1996). Our decision to contest is therefore in accordance with NEC policy, and cannot be overturned by the decision of the acting general secretary, but only by the NEC itself. Until we are informed of such a decision by the NEC, which in our view would be contrary to the best interests of the party, the working class and the struggle for socialism, we are duty bound to continue preparations for our general election contest in Brent East, and call for active support from the party as a whole.

I am sure you are aware that I am an elected member of the committee of West London SLP Branch and have been an active member of the party since I joined in late February 1996. At the March 2 policy conference you will recall I was elected report-back person for the working group on the proposed party constitution - as a matter of fact, the group which attracted the largest attendance that day. Since my report-back was disallowed by the chairperson, Patrick Sikorski, I expressed my fears from the floor that the draft constitution might be imposed without proper discussion, and you reassured me from the platform, in your final speech, that such undemocratic practices might have happened in the Labour Party, but would not happen in the SLP. Would that it were so!

Although, as I am sure you are aware, I was excluded from attending the May 4 founding congress of the party by Carolyn Sikorski - acting, she said, on a decision of the unelected steering committee - I have received no written communication concerning my exclusion, indeed no written admission that it even happened, despite a letter of protest from the West London Branch.

I have never received any official communication to the effect that my membership is ended, nor been informed of any disciplinary charge against me. Therefore I will continue to exercise my rights as a member and do my utmost to build the SLP into a mass democratic socialist party which can win working class loyalty away from the pro-capitalism Labour Party.

It would be unprincipled of me to accept expulsion by the acting general secretary’s diktat, through the columns of a hostile newspaper, without a charge, without the opportunity to answer any charge, and without any appeals procedure. A party built in such a manner, without membership rights, with members who meekly accepted such malpractice, would be incapable of leading the working class in its struggle for self-liberation through democratic socialism. Indeed you yourself would not put up with such treatment of a worker by his or her employer.

By insisting on respect for the democratic rights of the Brent East CSLP and my rights as an individual member, we are making a stand for democracy inside the SLP - an essential precondition for its success.

Yours for socialism,

Stan Keable
Secretary, Brent SLP
Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for Brent East