06.03.1997

Join the fight for self-determination

Ad hoc committee says ‘No’ to Labour sop

The March meeting of the National Council of the Scottish Socialist Alliance continued its ongoing discussion on the national question in Scotland, in particular its attitude to a referendum.

The motion below, proposed by Allan Green, was passed with a few amendments:

1. The National Council reiterates the support of the SSA for national self-determination and its commitment to struggle for a socialist Scotland.

2.We note, in the SSA constitution, the Charter for socialist change, aimed at a future Scottish parliament, and other materials, that the SSA stands for:

a) A sovereign Scottish parliament controlled by the Scottish people for the Scottish people, which has the right to decide what powers to retain in Scotland and what powers to share with other nations.
b) A Scottish parliament which is not subordinate to either Westminster or Brussels.
c) A Scottish parliament that has the power to transform Scotland into a republic, where sovereignty lies with the people, and where there is no role for an unelected House of Lords, nor for the royal prerogative and crown powers.
d) A multi-option referendum being the best way to allow the Scottish people to determine their own constitutional arrangements.

3. The SSA National Council agrees that the SSA should opt for a single-transferable-vote, multi-option referendum, to include the favoured options of different political parties: Tory status quo; Labour/Lib Dems-style devolution; SNP independence in Europe; and a question that reflects our position. We call on all other political parties to support this inclusive type of referendum as the most democratic way to determine Scotland’s constitutional future.

4. The National Council agrees that the outline for our question should be for a democratic republic with a view to negotiating a federal relationship with England, Wales and other nations in Europe. The nature of any federation would be for the Scottish parliament to agree with other nations. The SSA, hopefully in conjunction with socialists elsewhere, would call for cooperation around democratic socialist policies.

5. The National Council recognises the importance of the SSA continuing to develop links with other socialist organisations in order to build credibility for our vision of socialist cooperation throughout the world.

6. Should a future Labour government stage a ‘rigged’, two question referendum on devolution and tax raising powers, the SSA would support a double ‘yes’ vote, while continuing to campaign for a sovereign parliament and the policies contained in the Charter for socialist change.

A seventh point was deferred until the next meeting to allow branches and affiliated organisations time to discuss it. This read:

7. Should a multi-option referendum be staged without the inclusion of the SSA option, then we would, whilst continuing to campaign for our position and policies:

a) campaign for a first preference vote for ‘independence’.
b) call for a second preference vote for devolution.

There are a number of points that must be made about this resolution and the debate that took place. Firstly there appeared to be an important change in emphasis that must be welcomed. At the previous National Council meeting, a hastily prepared motion was presented, urgently pressing the SSA to agree a position on Labour’s proposed referendum.

After objections this motion was withdrawn to allow further time for discussion in the branches. Prior to this, the Glasgow SSA’s election bulletin not only gave the impression that Labour’s rigged referendum was a fait accompli, but committed the SSA to “campaign for a double ‘yes’ vote”, pre-empting any national debate on the question in the organisation. In contrast the above motion and the contributions from the proposers seemed to put more stress on campaigning for the SSA’s founding aim for a sovereign Scottish parliament with full powers.

However, the double ‘yes’ proposal still motivates the document, which is permeated by a nationalist perspective. Allan Green also proposed that any position agreed by the NC was an interim position until the June conference of the SSA had debated it. This was agreed. Communist Party of Great Britain members put forward an amendment calling for a boycott of Labour’s rigged referendum if it goes ahead.

This proposed deleting all after “tax raising powers” in point 6 and inserting: “the SSA would campaign vociferously for an active boycott of the referendum around the slogan ‘Nothing less than genuine self-determination’. This should incorporate a campaign for a sovereign Scottish parliament.” This amendment was defeated.

Another amendment, proposed by Scottish Militant Labour members from Edinburgh, was that in point 4 the SSA’s question should be for “a democratic, socialist republic ...” However, the amendment’s proposer withdrew it, correctly recognising that socialism could not come through a vote on a referendum for a Scottish parliament, but instead had to come through struggle. Although Glasgow’s election bulletin gives the impression that a parliament could “transform Scotland into a modern socialist democracy”.

It is positive that the National Council of the SSA is now looking to campaign around its own principled demands for genuine self-determination rather than immediately tailing Labour. However, the continued commitment to Labour’s double ‘yes’ vote surrenders the SSA’s key demands for a parliament with full powers. The very small step of Labour’s sop parliament is no guarantee that Scotland is on a one-way conveyor belt to genuine self-determination. The SSA needs to demand what is necessary. By saying ‘yes’ to nothing, it will only get nothing.

Some comrades, including CBGB supporters, have set up an ad hoc committee around the following aims:

1. For genuine self-determination
2. For a multi-option referendum to include the right to vote for a sovereign Scottish parliament with full powers
3. No to Labour’s narrow, rigged referendum

The main object of the committee will be to actively campaign for genuine self-determination along the lines of the SSA’s founding statement: “The SSA stands for the right of the people of Scotland to self-determination and will fight for a sovereign Scottish parliament which has the right to decide which powers to retain in Scotland and to determine its relationship with the rest of Britain and Europe”.

The campaign must emphasise that Labour’s current proposals come nowhere near meeting the aspiration of genuine democracy. The democratic aspirations of the Scottish people must not be bought off by Labour’s sop parliament.

If Labour refuses to include the proposal for a multi-option referendum, with a question reflecting the SSA’s aim, and insists on only presenting its own formula, then we will campaign for an active boycott around the slogan, “Nothing less than self-determination”.

The character of the campaign must be mass. It must go outwards, with the perspective of looking to organise demonstrations, pickets, petitions, occupations, strikes, mass civil disobedience, etc.

Nick Clarke