21.05.1998
Manchester SA collapses
The collapse into bureaucratic cliquism of the Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance, which has been apparent for several months, was consummated at the organisation’s annual conference on May 16. At a meeting attended by 23 members, including representatives of the Socialist Party, Socialist Outlook, Alliance for Workers’ Liberty, International Socialist League, the Campaign for a Democratic Socialist Labour Party and the CPGB, the only protest against at the appallingly bureaucratic and abusive conduct of the meeting by GMSA’s convenor, John Nicholson, came from CPGB and CDSLP comrades. By their silence in response to those protests, and by their abstention upon, or even positive support for, Nicholson’s procedural and constitutional manoeuvrings, the comrades from the Trotskyist groups - without exception - were complicit in an anti-democratic charade.
Originally billed as an all-day event, the start time of the conference had been put back by three hours, at three days notice, by Nicholson. This decision, taken without consultation with steering committee members, was ostensibly to allow conference participants to attend a demonstration in support of striking careworkers in nearby Tameside. It prepared the ground however, once the guest speaker from the Green Party and the discussion on the convenor’s report had been taken, for Nicholson to get away with suggesting that the “debates” on motions and amendments be restricted to one speaker on each side, with a time limit of one minute. The tyranny of the clock also became the excuse for a decision that candidates in elections for officers and steering committee should not be permitted to speak in support of their candidatures. Since nominations had not closed until the conference opened, no prior facility had been afforded either for circulation of election addresses.
Expressing his enthusiasm for the socialist alliances project, Spencer Fitzgibbon of the Green Party thanked the outgoing steering committee for the invitation to address the conference and looked forward to the forthcoming comparative discussions on Green Party policies and GMSA’s ‘Charter for socialist change’ which the GMSA leadership was proposing as a priority for the year to come. Repeating his mantra that a fully implemented Green Party programme left no room for capitalism, he welcomed the fact that “socialism has been greening itself”. Stressing his opposition to any suggestion that Socialist Alliances should eventually give way to a new mass workers’ party, Fitzgibbon made known his preference for “coalition around electoral and campaigning activities”. Although he omitted to explain why the Green Party had stood against socialist candidates in nine out of 11 city of Manchester wards contested by the SP, the SLP and the CPGB, Fitzgibbon insisted that the greens were not inflexible on electoral pacts. He reminded his audience of the greens’ decision to stand down in the Rusholme ward, just a few years ago, after the then Militant Labour candidate, Margaret Manning, had issued a manifesto which embraced green positions, for example on opposition to the second runway at Manchester airport, and on waste incineration.
Steve Riley, of the CPGB, made the only direct challenge to the notion that a “greening” of the Socialist Alliance was required. We actually need a “redding” of it, he insisted. “Although there are some socialists in the Green Party, there are many greens who are certainly not socialists. There are Malthusians, and those who see humanity only as part of an eco-system rather than as the centre of our project.” It is spurious to pursue illusions about “class-free” politics, the comrade concluded.
Spencer Fitzgibbon must have been bemused to find that, after expressing green willingness to be “flexible” on electoral pacts (and no doubt thinking that this issue was one of the main reasons why the Socialist Alliance wanted to talk to him), there was a distinct lack of enthusiasm for electoral work amongst the majority of those present. Chris Jones, of Socialist Outlook, with customary brevity asserted that there had been a drift into electoralism at the expense of “campaigning”. The emphasis should be very much the other way round, he suggested. Mark Catterall, of the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty, echoed comrade Jones’s views. Neither of these comrades were honest enough to admit that the idea of the Socialist Alliance standing candidates in elections caused them problems because of their respective organisations’ determination to continue to call upon workers to vote for the Labour Party. A string of ‘independents’, whom the author cannot resist likening to tired and oh so worldly-wise cynics, condemned the utter futility of socialists trying to create an independent working class electoral challenge. Steve Wallace, of the Socialist Party, stated that electoral work was important, whilst leaving us guessing whether he meant electoral work by the Socialist Alliance or independent Socialist Party campaigns. Only a comrade active in the Troops Out movement expressed explicit support for electoral work under the GMSA banner, before the opening discussion was guillotined.
Chris Jones then introduced a discussion on publicity. A regular bulletin for GMSA supporters had been produced during the last year. More recently, it had been decided to launch a magazine. A pilot issue, under the working title ‘GMSA Review’, had been produced in time for the conference, with the assistance of the office of Euro MP Michael Hindley. The review was intended to be an infrequent publication, whereas the bulletin was to continue to be regularly produced. There had been a major problem however, comrade Jones continued. The bulletin had functioned like an internal discussion document. This should not continue. The matter had come to a head at a recent steering committee meeting, over two articles from the CPGB which Jones thought should not have been published. One of these was in opposition to an article written by Jones himself in which he propounded Socialist Outlook’s ‘stop Emu’ position. The SO policy coincided with the consensual view of the GMSA, Jones asserted, whereas the ‘Working class agenda’ position on European integration, in the article written by John Pearson, was discordant with the consensus and polemical in nature. Similarly, an article by Steve Riley entitled “Left builds campaign against Labour”, which described the challenges being conducted in this year’s local council elections by the CPGB, the SLP and the SP, and which looked forward to a united GMSA campaign in next year’s local and European parliament elections, was in contradiction to the steering committee’s decision not to pursue the objective of a united electoral challenge this year.
The article should therefore not have been printed. At the steering committee meeting, Jones had proposed that articles submitted by comrades Pearson and Riley for the next bulletin should not be published because they would inevitably also be expressing minority and discordant views. Jones had been in a minority of one at the steering committee, but now returned to the attack. Only agreed GMSA positions should be published in the bulletin in future, he proposed. The infrequent review could be used for discussion purposes.
John Pearson, delegate from the CDSLP, condemned Jones’s attempt at censorship and linked this controversy with Nicholson’s attempt, in his convenor’s report, to brand as sectarianism the expression of minority views and attempts to draw out differences for debate. Comrade Pearson went on to detail the steering committee’s recent decision to abandon a previous commitment to hold a debate on Europe in favour of hosting a public meeting with a homogeneous platform of speakers, chosen by Socialist Outlook, who would all support the latter organisation’s views on Europe. It was the latter behaviour which was truly sectarian, comrade Pearson suggested.
Nicholson once again guillotined the discussion. He had another, far more effective, way to resolve the problem of dissidence - exclusion! He proposed a revised ‘structure’ for the GMSA, which contained two major changes from that adopted by the previous conference just 10 months earlier. The condition for GMSA membership had previously read, “Any individual, organisation or group which broadly agrees with the ‘founding statement’ (as updated), and agrees to abide by the structure, may join the GMSA”. The revision was to add “and the anti-sectarian way of working involved” to the conditions which must be abided by. The structure introduced in July 1997 had entitled all affiliated organisations to a seat on the steering committee. Now Nicholson proposed to delete this provision, replacing it with the right of affiliated organisations to make nominations (without limit of numbers) for 10 steering committee places.
The CPGB proposed two amendments to Nicholson’s amended structure. These would have reinstated the automatic right of all affiliates to a steering committee seat and inserted a statement in the membership conditions clause, to the effect that no organisation would be excluded for expressing its political beliefs. Nicholson proposed that there be just one speaker for, and one against, the CPGB amendments, with a one-minute time limit on the speeches. When John Pearson objected that Nicholson was misleading the meeting as to the status of his own proposals, which were also amendments to existing practice, the latter brushed aside the point of order with an injunction that the authority of the chair be respected. Pearson refused to give way, only to be ordered to “shut up” by Nicholson, who was by now increasingly resembling a manic Gordon Brittas. Trotskyists, who have sometimes boasted of political careers based upon fighting bureaucracy, sat in silence.
Steve Riley used his one-minute speech to implore comrades to remember that the Socialist Alliance was a unity project. Unity could not be achieved by the suppression of minorities and the exclusion of organisations who sought to argue for what they believed to be the truth. The deletion of the formula for reserved steering committee seats would inevitably mean that the large organisations - or secret caucuses - would monopolise the steering committee, thus discouraging smaller organisations from joining the alliance. The CPGB amendments were defeated by 10 votes to six, with only the two International Socialist League comrades adding their support, and seven comrades abstaining.
Nicholson then called the officer elections, firstly that of convenor, where the candidates were himself and John Pearson. He relinquished the chair only after comrade Pearson had pointed out the potential conflict of interest. Pearson went on to request that the candidates be allowed to speak in support of their candidatures. This was rejected by a majority of the meeting. Nicholson was re-elected as convenor by 19 votes to four. By the same majority, the incumbent editor, Steve Riley, was removed in favour of his predecessor who had resigned the position halfway through the last year, John Clegg. The steering committee elections followed. Twelve nominations had been submitted for the 10 non-officer positions. The political affiliations of the 12 were not announced as their names were read out. John Pearson, CDSLP, and Steve Riley, CPGB, were the two nominees not elected. The incoming committee includes three SP members. One of these, Margaret Manning, did not attend a single committee meeting last year. Her 100% inactivity record earned her 16 votes. Of course, nothing prevents disunity as effectively as total inactivity! The AWL, SO, and ISL retained their seats, scoring the same maximum 19 votes as the eight ‘independents’, who are overwhelmingly from the founding group around Nicholson. A newly elected Labourite, Derek Clarke of the Socialist Movement, received 16 votes, as did the SP members. Clearly, Labour Party loyalty attracts a premium in today’s Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance.
Steve Riley was granted one minute to propose the CPGB’s motion seeking to commit GMSA to stand candidates in future elections, and to work for unity on the basis of a minimum platform approach. The motion was defeated by 11 votes to eight, with four abstentions. An identical vote took place on the CDSLP’s motion seeking to commit the GMSA to fighting for an all-Britain federation of Socialist Alliances, and for the demand for a federal republic of England, Scotland and Wales, and a united Ireland. ‘Independent’ Declan O’Neill’s one-minute argument against this motion was to the effect that, if separation from the UK state was a good thing for Ireland, then it was equally so for the Scots and the Welsh.
After an all too brief flirtation with the idea of striving for genuine socialist unity, through the affiliate structure, through an open press, and through a programme of debate, the GMSA has effectively now reverted to the proprietorial control of the small clique which initiated its foundation. The closeness of the votes on two motions addressing important matters of principle, however, shows that this group can only maintain its grip in small meetings, and with the active or passive collaboration of opportunists within the revolutionary left.
Nicholson identified his group, in a report produced for the first national meeting of Socialist Alliances, held in Coventry on October 5 1996, as “individual socialists, not in any grouping, who had been formerly Labour Party members, councillors, and activists, for many years.” Others had been leading comrades in the Defend Clause Four - Defend Socialism campaign, alongside Arthur Scargill. “We proposed the first draft of what became the GMSA ‘founding statement’, to the secret meeting in the London hotel which, instead imposed the unconsulted and exclusive SLP constitution upon us.”
Thus Nicholson’s group were self-confessed SLP refuseniks. They had jumped aboard the left unity bandwagon that had been put into motion by Scargill when he broke with the Labour Party in October 1995. Their fortunes have shadowed those of the SLP. As the latter has waned, so has the GMSA. They have experienced the same difficulty as did Scargill in handling genuine proletarian democracy and revolutionary politics.
The 1997 ‘democratic’ relaunch of the stagnating GMSA was, in essence, a reaction to the bureaucratic degeneration and witch hunting which had occurred in the SLP. This was soon followed by excitement over the prospects presented by the Hugh Kerr/Ken Coates break from Labour, and at overtures received from another MEP, Michael Hindley. The clique resolved upon moves to forge a greater coherence as an organisation. Plans were laid, in close consultation with Hindley, for a magazine. A Socialist Alliances internet site appeared. The previous snail’s pace rate of progress in forging an English federation of socialist alliances was accelerated, with the calling of conferences at Walsall in November 1997, and then Coventry in March 1998. A fillip was given by the entry into the socialist alliances of a significant number of SLP deserters.
But Kerr and Coates did not come over. Adopting instead the role of arbiters, they founded the Independent Labour Network, whilst still making themselves available as speakers at Socialist Alliance public meetings and offering subsidies from their Strasbourg largesse to set up SA publications. Simultaneously, the largest left group participating in the alliances, the SP, consciously stepped down its level of involvement. In GMSA, as in other alliances, only token attendance and participation have been forthcoming from the SP. The latter further decided, early in 1998, that its intervention in the May 1998 council elections would be under its own independent banner, rather than as part of a united Socialist Alliances platform. This gave confidence to Socialist Outlook and other Labourite groups involved in alliances, to try to deliver the death blow to the prospects of an SA-coordinated electoral challenges to Labour.
John Pearson