02.09.1999

Break Nicholson’s stranglehold

Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance

A belated annual general meeting of the Greater Manchester Socialist Alliance will take place on September 11. It would not be stretching things to suggest that this could be make or break time for the GMSA, particularly in a period where the national network of Socialist Alliances appears to be stumbling without direction.

It has been the actions of the small clique which perpetuates itself as the ‘leadership’ of the GMSA that has been one of the flies in Dave Nellist’s ointment. Ably marshalled by GMSA’s mercurial convenor, John Nicholson (who was unfortunately supported - to varying degrees of explicitness - by the various Trotskyites present), last May’s AGM saw GMSA reverse a commitment whereby its affiliates had an automatic right to a place on its steering committee. In the voting that followed, all affiliates bar the CPGB and the Campaign for a Democratic Socialist Labour Party retained their seats on the committee. This represented nothing more than a ‘democratic’ coup to remove the CPGB and its perceived allies. The ‘unity’ project of GMSA became premised on the suppression of minorities.

Although comrade Nicholson and his trusted lieutenants were victorious on the day, GMSA (and by that token the national network) suffered a distinct loss of credibility. Comrades from the International Socialist League and the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty, who were prepared to tolerate Nicholson’s leadership of the GMSA, have reacted to his contempt for democracy with embarrassment, and of late, verbal opposition. Nicholson has further besmirched his reputation by the removal of known CPGB supporters from ‘his’ mailing list, despite that fact we remain a paid-up affiliate of GMSA.

As we predicted last year, comrade Nicholson’s bureaucratic clique have been unable to build anything concrete in the working class movement. This was shown in the aborted negotiations for a united socialist slate in the North West European elections. The likes of Nicholson and Margaret Manning used a mixture of tactics during discussions, ranging from fudged promises to moralistic support for the backsliding SWP and verbal suggestions from Nicholson that the whole project should be ditched.

Comrade Nicholson has of late seen his bloc on the steering committee unravel. Increasingly, he tends to rely on an ‘inner sanctum’ of individuals such as treasurer Declan O’Neill, Chris Jones (Manchester’s last remaining Socialist Outlook supporter) and comrade Manning (until recently a member of the Socialist Party in England and Wales). Nicholson can no longer rely on the likes of the ISL and the AWL after hitching the GMSA bandwagon to Manchester’s Campaign Against War in the Balkans. The fact that he was prepared to front a profoundly anti-democratic, pro-Serbian cartel and openly do the bidding of the SWP was obviously deeply abhorrent to the AWL. Even comrade Nicholson’s prize sycophant, Chris Jones, was forced into a tentative assertion of the right of the Kosovars to self-determination at a North West Socialist Alliance forum on the Balkans War.

On the back of these sobering experiences, Nicholson’s clique have obviously decided that the steering committee as presently constituted cannot be relied upon. Hence the AGM will be presented with a series of constitutional amendments from comrade Nicholson himself. When Manchester CPGB received a copy of these amendments it is fair to say that we were not disappointed. John Nicholson continues to be to democracy what Basil Fawlty is to gourmet nights. Indeed if 1998’s AGM was a tragedy, then that of 1999 threatens to be one huge constitutional farce.

GMSA’s current constitution states that it is “a broad, open, inclusive and flexible organisation, based on voluntary participation. GMSA is politically pluralistic and encourages all individuals, organisations and groups to participate fully in our vision of a socialist society and our way of working as an alliance.” Now obviously the inclusivist thrust of this clause has taken a bit of a battering following the exclusion of the CPGB in May 1998, but it is infinitely preferable to comrade Nicholson’s proposed amendment, which reads:

“GMSA encourages individuals, groups and organisations who agree with this statement [that adopted at the March 1999 national founding conference of the SA] and who agree to work together with others in the anti-sectarian approach involved in this statement, to apply for membership of GMSA” (my emphasis).

It is interesting that one can never quite gather from its proposers what “anti-sectarian” means. In the practical experience of Manchester CPGB sectarians are defined by Nicholson and co as those who step outside and argue against the green/ethical pap espoused by soft left Labourite exiles. This amendment is therefore nothing more than an attempt to close down the already truncated avenues of debate inside GMSA in favour of lowest-common-denominator platitude. It is also a clause just waiting to be utilised by witch-hunters. GMSA adopts such an amendment at its own peril.

The ‘implementation of policy and new activities’ and the organisation of conferences is, in theory at least, currently undertaken by the (exclusivist) steering committee, which includes the five elected officers and 10 members elected by the AGM. Nicholson proposes that this should now be “the responsibility of the elected officers”. In plain English, the steering committee is to be scrapped. What Nicholson is trying to do here is to formalise an existing arrangement whereby he relies upon selected ‘loyalists’ to run GMSA. It is also an admission that comrade Nicholson sees the likes of the AWL and the ISL as suspect bloc partners - the events of the Balkans war shattered this particular ‘unity’.

This amendment is also an attempt to finally get rid of the CPGB, who have consistently embarrassed GMSA officers because of our public defiance of their disgraceful exclusion of our organisation. In reality comrades Nicholson, Manning, Jones and co know our continued absence from the steering committee is untenable in terms of their own democratic credibility. Hence the attempt to circumvent their blushes by ditching the steering committee altogether. With an arrogance that befits the man Nicholson appears certain that he and his allies can gain the five officer’s positions in GMSA.

As can be seen from the above, proprietorial control is the overriding aim. This impression is further reinforced by comrade Nicholson’s proposed amendment to the membership clause. This currently reads: “Individual membership shall be open to anyone living in Greater Manchester and to anyone in neighbouring areas.” Nicholson’s proposal retains this statement as its opening, adding:

“Applications shall be considered by the officers, whose decision shall be final in between annual conferences. The annual conference shall ratify or otherwise all decisions of the officers. Annual conference decision shall be final.”

Nothing could illustrate better the method of clique-building. In the absence of any expressed criteria, presumably it is only those deemed acceptable by comrade Nicholson who will be able to join. Like the sectarians whom he purports to detest, he believes that he can build a career by excluding those who step outside a narrowly defined ‘consensus’. If potential recruits are prepared to accept the aims and constitution of GMSA then membership should be an automatic right.

The political method of Nicholson has nothing whatsoever to do with the building of a broad-based, democratic, working class alliance. It has everything to do with bureaucratic manoeuvre. It is unsurprising that the incumbent ‘leaders’ of the GMSA have done virtually nothing in terms of initiating campaigns and electoral interventions. Back-slapping and the odd tightly controlled conference are simply not the means by which socialists rally the working class. If Nicholson gets his way and these amendments win at the 1999 AGM, then it really will have to be questioned what possible further use GMSA will be to the working class.

In order to save the GMSA the CPGB is approaching all democrats and revolutionaries in the labour movement to break Nicholson’s stranglehold. The AWL is proposing a set of amendments to those of Nicholson, many of which Manchester CPGB agrees with. Comrades, Nicholson and his clique have no divine right over GMSA. If the democrats unite, comrade Nicholson and his courtiers can be stopped. Then GMSA can move forward as an open, inclusive, campaigning force for the Manchester labour movement.

Phil Watson