09.05.2001

Scargill loses debate on unity

Socialist Alliance on the up

Teesside's commemoration of International Workers' Day took place in central Middlesbrough last Saturday, May 5. Arthur Scargill, leader of the Socialist Labour Party, was the main speaker at the regional TUC-organised event, which was initially intended to be strictly 'non-political'. The Socialist Alliance was refused a speaker.

It was of course somewhat naive to suggest that in the run-up to a general election Scargill would not be overtly political, and would not attempt to nullify the Socialist Alliance's efforts in the constituency by projecting his own party's sectarian aims - a party which has decided to stand a candidate in Middlesbrough against the SA and refused to even discuss how such a clash can be avoided.

Around 200 demonstrators from various traditions assembled around the Bottle of Notes monument in central Middlesbrough on Saturday morning. Contingents from a variety of trade unions, including the ISTC steelworkers union and NASUWT, took to the streets, along with small groups from other assorted campaigns. Even the Green Party had a bunch of avid supporters, along with their whistles and sandals, on the march, although unfortunately the ?150 samba band they had allegedly booked for the occasion failed to materialise, much to our disappointment.

About 10 comrades from Teesside Socialist Alliance positioned themselves near the front of the demonstration, brandishing a new banner kindly made up and donated by two comrades from Hartlepool, who joined us on Saturday. Middlesbrough's candidate, Geoff Kerr Morgan of the SWP, and Lawrie Coombs of the CPGB, candidate for Stockton South, were present, as was the Rebel youth group.

Although our contingent was small, widespread support for the SA amongst the demonstrators was clear-cut. Leafleting before and during the march provoked much interest, and most notably, when a group of teenagers skateboarding nearby were approached with leaflets and petitions, they eagerly donated five pounds to the cause and joined us on the march. "Ah, so you're revolutionaries, then?" "Definitely," they said: apparently one of their grandparents was an active member of the old CPGB. This sort of thing just demonstrates once more that our politics do have the potential to reach out, not least to youth.

The march itself, although modest in comparison with its London equivalent, was a success. Under the watchful eye of a considerable troupe of police, the marchers made their way to the Cleveland Trade Unionists' and Unemployed Workers' Resource in an atmosphere that was fraternal and jovial. A number of onlookers donated money and signed petitions for the Socialist Alliance.

After the march's conclusion, the demonstrators and a few onlookers who had been recruited along the way went on to the rally, where Scargill - along with two other speakers, John Bryan of the Natfhe national executive, and Peter Widlinski, a representative of the North East Coalition of Asylum Rights - was scheduled to speak.

The meeting room was packed, with only standing room left after everyone had piled in. After speeches from comrades Bryan and Widlinski came the main attraction, Arthur Scargill himself. A CPGB comrade had overheard a brief conversation between Scargill and one of the organisers earlier that morning. Scargill was asked to confirm the capacity in which he was there: supposedly as leader of the NUM. In reply to this, Scargill simply retorted, "I come here to speak as a revolutionary, comrade."

Although it is doubtful whether his speech could be defined as "revolutionary", Scargill's response was certainly well made. It is typical of union bureaucrats to attempt to artificially separate trade union questions from 'politics' - usually in the interests of the Labour Party. To his credit the SLP general secretary ignored their pleas. What a pity that his speech was so entirely sectarian. Brandishing the party's manifesto in his right hand, and intermittently waving it before the audience, he presented himself and the SLP as the sole answer, specifically opposed to working class unity. He even claimed a 6,000-strong active membership - clearly an absurdity.

The hypocrisy was clear for all to see. He termed the SLP's programme and manifesto "Marxist", denounced the draconian handling of the May Day demonstrations around the world, and then proceeded to boast of how he had reprimanded a party comrade, apparently for complaining about the lack of reference to 'arming the working class' in the SLP's programme. I was somewhat flummoxed by how Scargill thought the working class could make revolution without first arming itself. But the speech was delivered in his usual impassioned style and received a warm reception from a good section of the audience.

However, the issues he touched upon were often the very ones which Teesside Socialist Alliance has been out on the streets campaigning about for the past three months. Scargill's party have not been seen. It has not so much as raised a finger in Middlesbrough for its general election 'campaign'.

Just as Scargill was finishing his hour-long speech, a tired looking figure pushed his way in through the door and made hastily for the front. This was the SLP's parliamentary candidate for Middlesbrough, who proceeded to introduce himself, hands firmly in pockets, in a broad Liverpudlian accent. He gave a short speech about his experiences as an activist in Liverpool, and then promised that he would do "as much as possible" for Middlesbrough this general election.

However, from the floor Lawrie Coombs, SA candidate for Stockton South, called upon the SLP to "stop the waste" of votes and resources which is pulling the left apart in constituencies where socialist stands against socialist. "We need to be sure that we strike with the maximum impact possible," he argued. Another SA comrade, this time from Hartlepool, also attacked Scargill's sectarian position, pointing out that Hartlepool SA, in the interests of unity, had agreed not to stand a candidate in the constituency which Scargill himself was contesting: "We did the decent thing - the right thing," he said. He asked the SLP's leader why he could not show the same maturity in Middlesbrough, which sparked a rumble of support from the audience.

Ironically Scargill will not be unopposed on the left despite the decision of the SA to back him. John Booth, a former Labour Party press officer who was dismissed from his post in 1986, is also standing against Peter Mandelson in the constituency. Booth, who has been a Labour Party member since 1970, and was regarded by Mandelson as too leftwing, is standing as 'Genuine Labour'.

Scargill gave a rather fudged answer to both comrades, attacking various left groups for not joining his party in 1996 because they "would not give up their own identity". "For god's sake don't tell the SLP not to stand in this constituency ... we are a party with the right principle," he garbled. Evidently not the right principle of democratic unity, however, comrade.

John Malcolm of the Socialist Alliance called Scargill's attitude "a great shame", describing the ridiculous situation in which SA comrades are out on the streets campaigning every Saturday morning, while the SLP is nowhere to be seen. Another SA comrade also questioned Scargill's attitude to unifying the working class under one banner.

Scargill's logic was tortured. He practically condemned the Socialist Alliance for bringing the subject of unity up in the first place. He argued a federal structure was the "worst aspect of any organisation ... it won't work, it can't work". And, in a frantic attempt to rebut the SA's criticisms, he said an alliance was "a matter for you, comrades". Bizarrely, he went on to plead: "For god's sake don't ask us to join an alliance which is not a party ... when those parties who form it refused to join the Socialist Labour Party in 1996."

What narcissistic nonsense. An almost sickening 'Vote SLP' speech followed, before he concluded: "Don't campaign against us in a meeting like this when you should be arguing the policies of socialism!" Perhaps a better proposal would be for his party not to campaign against us in the same constituency, when they should be arguing the case for greater unity. Clearly by the end of the morning the absurdity of Scargill's sectarianism had shifted the audience, which contained a number of ex-SLP members, over to the idea of left unity offered by the alliance.

On a different topic a comrade from Natfhe asked an interesting question towards the end of the morning - "Why do we even pretend to believe there is a parliamentary road to socialism?" Well, comrade, for us, the answer is simple. We don't. But in the Socialist Alliance every individual and organisation - including the SLP, if Scargill could for a moment put aside his egocentricity and do the right thing by working class unity - is allowed to put forward their own perspective.

James Bull