12.03.1998

Boycott Blair referendum

Government proposals for a strong London mayor and a weak Greater London Authority must be rejected

Tony Blair and his New Labour government are in the midst of carrying out a far reaching programme of reform from above. Though some, for their own narrow nationalist reasons, deny it, notably Scottish Militant Labour’s Alan McCombes, there is indeed an evolving plan “to reform and modernise the union” (A McCombes Scottish independence and the struggle for socialism p6). Because it is so unpopular the constitutional monarchy system needs to be thoroughly ‘updated’. In other words, change to prevent change.

Naturally there exists a complex inter-relationship between reform from above and discontent below. That explains why Blair does not merely want to overhaul and repackage the way we are ruled. He needs to win popular acceptance for and identification with ‘cool Britannia’.

Scotland and Wales have already been successfully dealt with. The referendums on September 11 1997 gave the government an overwhelming majority in Scotland and a wafer thin one in Wales (since the 1970s discontent with the old constitutional arrangement was palpable and deep seated in Scotland). Edinburgh will therefore soon have its parliament, Cardiff its assembly. The House of Lords, proportional representation, the European Union and the single currency, Northern Ireland and the extended royal family are, as a recent editorial in The Times notes, all “elements” in a wide “modernisation project” (March 10 1998). So too is London. The May 7 referendum is designed to gain a mandate for the Blairite version of local government.

Compared with every other city in Europe local government in London is a farce. Since Thatcher abolished the Greater London Council in 1986, Londoners have been governed by some 60 shadowy quangos, 32 ineffective and squabbling boroughs and the City of London Corporation. Behind the pomp and circumstance of the so-called City lies the interests of the banks, insurance companies and the stock exchange. A million people work within the ‘square mile’, but few if any live there. When it comes to the elections for the Lord Mayor and the City Corporation, money and invented tradition counts. What of the real city, the city of seven million in Greater London and the 12.5 million in Metropolitan London?

For London as a whole and its M25 environs there is no elected body to coordinate housing, health, transport, environmental protection, education or other vital matters. Neither the boroughs nor the quangos fight for the people. They are dominated by cabals of Labour and Tory politicians who, when not corruptly serving themselves, carry through expenditure cuts ordered by the treasury. Bankers, property speculators and contractors have made fortunes while services in London have deteriorated to the point of breakdown.

Rush hour travel by underground is a daily hell - the system is overcrowded and squalid. Roads are so clogged that the average speed at which traffic moves “has fallen to 11mph” (R Rogers and M Fisher A new London Harmondsworth 1992, p17). Streets are filthy with litter. Schools crumble. Hospitals are being systematically closed. Houses, shops, offices and factories lie empty. Young people beg by day and sleep in doorways. Women are frightened to go out alone at night. London is in visible decay.

Blair says his strong US style mayor and a weak Greater London Authority is the solution. The idea is not only illusory but a travesty of democracy. To all intents and purposes Blair’s London mayor would be a combination of an elected dictator and a puppet. He or she will have executive powers to “make things happen”. The ‘slimline’ assembly can “question” the mayor’s proposals and plans but do nothing more than “disagree or suggest changes where necessary” (Department of the Environment New leadership for London,p3). But while the mayor will be all-powerful in telling the people of London what cannot be afforded and why they have to pay extra taxes, he or she will dance to the tune of big business and Whitehall mandarins when it comes to deciding lucrative contracts and dishing out public funds. Like every other ‘reform’ of local government it will not take long before general disillusionment sets in and another round of reorganisation becomes necessary.

Thanks to the ignominious collapse of  ‘municipal socialism’ and the absence of a viable alternative to Labourism there is no mass movement in London, latent or otherwise, which at the present time is committed to, or yearns for something higher than the gimmick Blair has on offer. There is not even a sentiment for the return of Ken Livingstone’s GLC. That does not mean communists and socialists should meekly or even ‘critically’ accept Blair’s mayor and his GLA. Though that will surely be the position of the pro-Labour left - from the Socialist Workers Party to ‘official communism’.

The May 7 referendum contains only one pre-set take-it or leave-it question. Hence the referendum is rigged in the classic manner of a Bonaparte, a Mussolini or a Hitler. It is a catch 22. To vote ‘yes’ is to vote against democracy. To vote ‘no’ is to vote against democracy. Blair’s referendum is designed not to present and freely test all options before the people of London but to get the predetermined ‘yes’ result the government wishes for. Those on the left who stand for the maximum of democracy under capitalism have no official opportunity on the ballot paper to put their proposals forward and measure the support for their ideas.

The Communist Party of Great Britain has no truck with the status quo. Hence we do not want to be associated with any ‘no’ campaign. To urge a ‘no’ vote under present circumstances might easily be seen as support for the present system. We therefore call for a boycott of Blair’s London referendum. Not on the basis of passively rejecting Blair’s GLA. But positively on the basis of actively fighting for a London Assembly with real powers.

A London Assembly mustbeabletoraise its own revenues. We are for a local income tax - tax the rich, no tax on the working class. The undemocratic City of London Corporation must be abolished. The London Assembly must have responsibility throughout the city as a whole for transport, planning, economic development and policing (the CPGB is for the disbanding of the brutal Metropolitan police and its replacement by an armed popular militia). We believe that all elections, including those to a London Assembly, should be on the basis of proportional representation. Those elected must also be recallable and subject to the supervision and criticism of council workers. They know what really goes on behind the scenes. The leader of the London Assembly should not be some tin-pot dictator. They must reflect and be chosen by the majority of elected representatives. We oppose fat-cat allowances and expense accounts. Unlike Labourites, Lib Dems and Tories, elected communists do not want to enrich themselves. They are committed to take only the average workers wage - no more.

Furthermore, because the May 7 referendum is an integral part of Blair’s constitutional programme from above, we will make propaganda through our boycott campaign for an all-Britain constitutional programme that relies on working class self-action from below. Democratic local government is only possible in the context of a complete transformation of the constitution.

Where Blair proposes to tinker with the constitutional monarchy system, we fight for the end of all hereditary privileges and undemocratic practices. That means the abolition not only of the House of Lords but the monarchy itself. Communists look forward to a federal republic of England, Scotland and Wales. We are for the free unity of the peoples of Britain, not the unity of crowns. Scotland and Wales can then really have the right to self-determination - the right to freely determine their own relationship with the rest of Britain. Scotland and Wales ought to be able to separate and establish independent states. But they must also have the right to voluntarily unite with the people of England.

As we have argued before, boycotting a “rigged referendum” is “not the same” as boycotting normal bourgeois elections (J Conrad Blair’s rigged referendum and Scotland’s right to self-determination London 1997, p17). However much things are stacked against us in European, Westminster and local elections, our candidates have the opportunity to argue for, defend and test our programme of revolutionary democracy and socialism. Hence there is no contradiction between urging a boycott of the May 7 referendum in London and standing candidates for the local elections on the same day and fighting for a leftwing candidate for the London mayor if the referendum gives the government the ‘yes’ result it expects. The CPGB will indeed be standing candidates, including in London, on May 7. We also want voters to support candidates of the Socialist Alliance and all other socialists who stand on a principled platform (see back page).

Our boycott of the May 7 referendum is not merely due to some sense of moral disapproval, because it is rigged. Boycott of the May 7 referendum is a tactical question decided on the basis of concrete circumstances, not least the necessity of making propaganda for the democratic alternative to Blair’s GLA and his reformed constitutional monarchy.

Jack Conrad