WeeklyWorker

17.07.1997

Fight for genuine self-determination

As the campaign takes off, tensions grow within the Scottish Socialist Alliance

With the approach of Labour’s rigged referendum on Scottish devolution, the campaign for an active boycott makes clear that we do not have to accept New Labour’s fait accompli. The Campaign for Genuine Self-Determination (CGSD) will be launched at a press conference in Glasgow on Monday July 21.

Campaign headquarters are now open at 40 Osborne Street, Glasgow G1. As well as highlighting the campaign’s aims and the nature of the sell-out that Labour has on offer, it will host a number of discussions and debates on issues from ‘A federal republic or a Scottish workers’ republic?’ to ‘John Maclean - the legacy’.

While Scotland Forward, the establishment campaign for a ‘yes, yes’ vote, closes down dialogue and discussion on the constitutional question, the Campaign for Genuine Self-Determination will open it up.

Inevitably, this will upset all those who are supporting the government proposals and the Scottish establishment. It has already deeply upset some members of the Scottish Socialist Alliance.

At the SSA National Council meeting on Sunday July 13, members of the leadership moved a motion against CPGB comrades for producing and distributing the first CGSD leaflet.

The contentious leaflet has widely circulated both within and outside the SSA since March. It was distributed during the general election in Dundee and has been the only alternative view on display at Scotland Forward rallies.

Ostensibly the problem was around the sentence: “The Campaign for Genuine Self-Determination was formed by members of the Scottish Socialist Alliance who are committed to fighting for a parliament with real powers.”

At last month’s national council meeting, Allan Green of the Scottish Socialist Movement complained that, although the leaflet was “technically correct”, it was misleading in “giving the impression that the campaign was supported and initiated by the SSA”.

Sadly the SSA leaders are now embarrassed by this leaflet, since the majority buckled under the pressure of opportunism to accept Labour’s sop and vote ‘yes, yes’. When the leaflet was produced there was in fact no SSA position and the CGSD was hoping to influence other SSA members prior to the national conference decision.

Launching another attack on CPGB members and ultimately against democracy within the SSA itself, Allan Green this month said the leaflets had “upset and puzzled” some members of the Labour Party and had been “deliberately used against the Alliance by mischief makers”.

I responded by reiterating that there had been no intention to confuse. Indeed the campaign’s new leaflet is highly critical of the Alliance’s stance on the referendum which we believe to be a betrayal of the SSA’s founding statement to fight for a sovereign Scottish parliament with full powers.

Clearly, if confusion has arisen it is not because the minority of the SSA has stated its view openly but because the majority has not. Instead it has completely submerged itself into Scotland Forward. The SSA has not produced any material to distribute at these meetings and, where members have attended, they have not - with the exception of the CPGB comrades - put over the SSA position on self-determination for Scotland.

Bill Bonner of the Communist Party of Scotland said he “quite frankly found Mary’s comments unconvincing”. He became very angry that we intended to use the term “rebel members of the Alliance” and suggested that we should not use the SSA’s name on any CGSD materials. Others present started to suggest ways that the CGSD leaflet should be written.

Anne Murphy of the CPGB took exception to any suggestion that CPGB members had in any way acted in an underhand or dishonest way. She gave examples of other SSA members. Founding SSA members who are also members of the Communist Party of Scotland campaigned for the Labour Party in the general election against SSA candidates. Whilst arguing vehemently against such actions, CPGB comrades defended their right to campaign for a minority view within the Alliance united front. In fact, no Alliance member had attempted to stop them. Hopefully the Alliance will not become the impotent low level, activist talking shop that the CPS seems to want it to be.

Sean Clerkin, Paisley SSA election candidate, while arguing for the CGSD to change its leaflets, also expressed his dismay at the SSA’s inactivity around the referendum. He felt that the SSA’s position of supporting a multi-option referendum and a democratic republic should be pushed.

Tommy Sheridan was far more conciliatory on the question of the CGSD leaflet, saying that “of course comrades have the right to say they are members of the Alliance” and he hoped that future material would be clearer. On the Alliance’s own campaign, he felt it was unrealistic to produce materials campaigning for a multi-option referendum in the next few months and the Alliance should work to maximise a double ‘yes’ vote.

Andrew Lewis of the Scottish Socialist Movement, on the other hand, argued that if members were not fully committed to making the SSA work then they should rethink their position within the SSA. Perhaps it is the role and purpose of the SSA which needs to be more fully discussed. Is it indeed a united front or simply a bureaucratic front under the stranglehold of the majority view?

Rosie Kane, co-chair of the SSA, said that what was really damaging was the SSA’s involvement in Scotland Forward. She too felt that comrades of all views should be able to say they are Alliance members without fear of recrimination.

The discussion was heated and some people worked themselves into such a frenzy that they seemed on the verge of moving bureaucratic restriction on members. Eventually however a two-part resolution was moved:

Part one of the resolution was passed by seven votes to four with one abstention. The second part was overwhelmingly supported with only one vote against.

I think the debate highlighted the cul de sac the SSA is now in, having supported the call for a double ‘yes’ vote and entered Scotland Forward. The people who took the SSA into Scotland Forward find the active campaign of the CGSD an embarrassment when compared to their own passivity.

The letter from Scotland Forward’s national organiser, Paolo Verstri, to the SSA, welcoming it as part of Scotland Forward, made it quite clear that no one from the SSA would be asked to speak on its platform. Verstri will call the tune and SSA members will be expected to follow.

Some members of the SSA leadership are more concerned with helping their ‘friends’ in the Labour Party than they are with building a revolutionary alternative to Labourism. The final irony of the day came when the National Council was about to end with still no indication of how they were planning to campaign around the referendum. I had to ask under ‘any other business’ exactly what was going to happen and Allan Green said he would produce a leaflet on the SSA’s position.

It was obvious from the start that ‘yes, yes’ and Scotland Forward would reduce the SSA to the role of a passive bystander during the referendum campaign and this has proven to be so.

Every day that passes brings with it more indications of the watering down of Labour’s proposals.

Political observers such as Ian Bell of The Scotsman realise that what is on offer is not only useless - it is insulting: “an amusing parody of local government” (The Scotsman July 14). For those who really want to change the constitutional status quo, there are only really two options: “Independence is one of two logical outcomes available if Scots reject the status quo. The other is federalism” (ibid). Blair’s sop is designed to keep things as they are. It merely creates the illusion of democracy and is certainly not worth fighting for.

In this political context, the Campaign for Genuine Self-Determination can begin to articulate the real aspirations of the mass of people in Scotland. Only in this way can the working class find a voice strong enough to challenge the anti-democrats of Labour, to which the likes of Green and Bonner would have us permanently chained.

Mary Ward