31.01.2002

'Swampos' derailed

Comrades from the Revolutionary Democratic Group give their view of events in Bedfordshire Socialist Alliance

Bedfordshire Socialist Alliance (BSA) has started the new year with a bang. Going against the national trend, 27 new members have just joined. The credit for this seems to be wholly down the local Socialist Workers Party organiser who recruited them all from her list of SWP paper members and ex-members. It was a resounding rebuff for all those cynics who said the SWP was only interested in electoral activity. There are no local elections in Luton scheduled for this year. Not quite. There was the small matter of elections for the BSA officers' posts taking place that very day. With 50 members crammed in the room, half a dozen jammed in the doorway and more than a few hanging out the windows, the air was thick with expectation. The shootout at the OK Corral had nothing on this. Was this to be the final confrontation between a tiny group of Revolutionary Democratic Group comrades and the mighty SWP? Certainly something significant was happening, signalled by the arrival of Will McMahon, Socialist Alliance national executive member, hotfoot from London. The SWP objective was crystal clear. It was to get rid of comrades Danny Thompson, Jane Clarke and Eryk Karas as officers. We know this not just because the SWP put up candidates to replace them, but because suddenly some nasty rumours started circulating. To understand the situation more fully it should be noted that comrade Thompson was one of two RDG members in the BSA and the only RDG member on the officers committee. The other two comrades were BSA officers and RDG sympathisers. These comrades had played a central role in launching and building the BSA. They had only just been re-elected as part of the BSA officers (or executive) committee at the AGM on December 9. Twenty-seven new members changed all that. It caused one comrade, who usually referred to SWP comrades by the affectionate name of "swoppos", to rechristen them "swampos". It shed new light on the ridiculous nonsense that took place before the BSA annual general meeting. The AGM had been scheduled months in advance. But the SWP were desperate to stop it taking place. First they claimed not to have had sufficient notice. Then they claimed not to have received their mailings. Then they came up with a petition from 'angry' non-members, some of whom were in other SAs. Then we spent two hours at the AGM arguing over whether the meeting should take place or not. What had this been all about? Well, now it was obvious. The December 1 SA conference had been a major victory for the SWP. They helped get rid of the Socialist Party and now they felt politically empowered to settle some old scores in the BSA. But the AGM was simply too soon for the SWP to get all their members signed up. They wanted it delayed until February. In the end the AGM was two short of the quorum. The meeting provisionally elected new officers to be confirmed in January. The SWP saw this as a major mobilisation. Anyone was welcome, from Barnet to Exeter, political or not. 'Party' discipline demanded attendance and 'bloc voting'. As we sat waiting for the meeting to start, there was time to ponder on the politics that so upset the SWP. More than anything, the RDG had a coherent set of policies. This actually helped to empower the BSA independents. The 'indies' are not a unified bloc. By definition they are all different. If one group or party had monopolised the BSA, that group would very likely have run the show, being a major source of ideas, organisation and discipline. But in the BSA the indies had a choice. There was the SWP and the RDG each offering an alternative road. The BSA indies were not simply the foot soldiers for one faction. In a democratic organisation, which the BSA definitely was, they were actually in a position to choose the path to follow. Much to the annoyance of the SWP, it was the RDG that increasingly won a hearing amongst the independents. This would soon be shown in the voting figures. We were clear that the SA should be a democratic organisation open to both communists and those from a Labour tradition. The BSA was one of the first local SAs to write a local programme and adopt a local constitution, so that relations between members would be political and democratic, and not follow the anarchic and bureaucratic methods that seemed to characterise the local SWP. Now we were one of the first to re-articulate our position in the light of the SA general election manifesto People before profit and the new national constitution. Without any understanding of programme SWP members did not seem to know what they were doing or why they were doing it. Their idea of politics seemed to be to rush round like headless chickens, getting all excited, campaigning here, there and everywhere. Running out of such chickens in their own ranks, the BSA independents might provide a new source. So imagine their frustration when they had the misfortune to meet a small group of revolutionary communists with different ideas to their own. The RDG promoted the SA as a medium for left unity. We saw democracy and republicanism as the obvious political focal point for left unity. We did not want to limit the BSA to another SWP campaigning front of the ANL type, waiting to be turned on and off by the central committee. The BSA members began to see the need for a broad-based party of the left. They now wanted an SA newspaper and looked to the example of the Scottish Socialist Party as broadly the model to follow. There are no more advanced political positions in the SA than these. The meeting began with an appeal from the new chair for support in a most difficult task. She was not helped by constant SWP challenges or by the interventions of one of their new members who was obviously drunk. He kept saying he had just come to vote and wanted to cut the talking and get on with it. Apologies, minutes and matters were quickly passed. The SWP sought to change the agenda by introducing the elections under matters arising from the AGM. But RDG comrades pointed out that if that happened the new recruits would not yet be accepted into membership, which was the next item on the agenda. The SWP would not have had a majority. So the SWP members withdrew that proposal and we moved to the next item. The membership secretary then welcomed all the new members, reading out their names so they could identify themselves. With everybody now at the starting line, and an SWP majority in place, we moved on to the three main items - perspectives, constitution and elections. There were two perspectives documents: one from the RDG and one from the SWP. The proposals were very similar as far as work with trade unions and asylum-seekers was concerned. But that was where the SWP proposals started and finished. The RDG document tied its proposals to People before profit. It began with September 11 and the war against terrorism. It focused on the need to campaign in defence of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. It then went onto make some proposals for activity around the jubilee and the opportunity to raise democratic political demands. The mover of the RDG perspectives pointed out that comrade Viv Smith was the local SWP organiser. So the way she voted was the decisive factor. We were reminded that she was the representative of the SWP central committee in the meeting. The danger for comrade Smith was that when the SWP central committee learned that she voted on their behalf against the Al Qa'eda prisoners and against a republican alternative to the monarchy they would not be best pleased. It would make them look as if they were against the RDG proposals either because they were sectarians or economists. So it would surely be a good idea if comrade Smith 'phoned a friend' such as comrade Rob Hoveman or John Rees before 'asking the audience'. The RDG proposed an adjournment for the very purpose. We did not want to drop the SWP central committee right in it. The offer was politely declined. Next up was the SWP speaker to propose their perspectives. This comrade soon made it clear that in fact she did not have any problems with what the RDG proposed. Why not merge the two documents? With SWP members nodding in agreement we arrived at unanimity. Even comrade Smith now felt this was now a good idea. The meeting moved on quickly to constitutional matters. Again there were two proposals. The BSA officers had a new local constitution drafted to take account of the decisions of the December 1 conference. The SWP motion called for affiliation to the SA and proposed the end of any local constitution. The chair pointed out that we were already affiliated so it was a non-issue. A unanimous vote was taken to confirm our continued affiliation. The chair informed the meeting that the BSA officers would be opposed to working without a local constitution. They considered it would open the door to undemocratic practices and 'making it up on the hoof'. If we ended up with no local constitution they would have to consider their position. The debate began with a strong case made for the new BSA constitution by comrade Clarke. The issue was the rights of members and how they could decide BSA policy. It was also pointed out that the constitution guaranteed that recognised supporting organisations would have a minimum of one representative on the BSA executive. The constitution was supported by the RDG. Here was the political essence of the dispute. The contrast was sharp enough. The SWP came to the meeting intending to remove the one RDG member and the two members thought to be sympathetic from the BSA officers posts. The RDG would be excluded. The clear intention of the SWP was to use their new-found majority to exclude the RDG. By contrast the RDG supported constitutional proposals that would guarantee the SWP a seat on the BSA executive even if they were a minority. One side rested on the case for an inclusive and democratic alliance. The other side was seeking the dictatorship of the SWP. Like all dictatorships the first thing was to tear up any democratic constitution. The meeting moved to the vote. The proposal from the BSA officers secured 22 votes and the SWP proposal to get rid of any BSA constitution scored 26. The chair announced the result and then explained that the BSA officers would not be able to work without a local constitution. There was no longer any democratic constitutional basis for elections. There was no question of the independent members, who had spent the last 12 months building the SA, working under a de facto SWP dictatorship without any constitution. What made it even worse was that the new comrades had played no part whatsoever in any SA business including the general election campaign. Many of these new-found converts had not even been members of the SA before January 27 2002. For 19 of the 26 this was their first SA 'business' meeting ever! Amid the ensuing confusion the chair appeared to close the meeting. The SWP members looked gob-smacked. The next item was due to be their long awaited elections. Then it became clear that the meeting was simply adjourned, whilst the officers considered whether to resign. All the officers, the independents and the RDG left the room to discuss what to do. After 10 minutes and some conciliation from Will McMahon, it was agreed the meeting would reconvene to hear a statement from the BSA officers. The chair explained what the BSA officers had decided. They would not resign. It would be irresponsible to do so at this moment of crisis. They had been elected and confirmed at the start of the meeting. They would not continue the meeting without a democratic constitution. We were already half an hour past the time the meeting was due to end and a number of members had left. The officers intended to call for discussions with the SA national executive to see how and if the problems could be resolved. We listened to what some SWP members had to say. All they wanted was to hold the elections. The chair then closed the meeting and the majority of members left. What took place in the BSA was a direct result of the decisions of the December 1 conference. It gave the SWP the green light. It was obvious to everybody but the most naive political ignoramuses that after the Socialist Party had been pushed out the next target would be the BSA and the RDG. After the last SA Liaison Committee in 2001, Dave Griffiths, Socialist Party member from Coventry, predicted that the BSA would be the first Socialist Alliance to be disaffiliated or excluded. There is now only one thing left for the SWP to do. Engineer a split or secure the first SA expulsions. Post script It is now our understanding that despite the meeting being formally closed, a few SWP members decided to carry on the meeting, without any of the existing officers present (including the majority of their 'slate'), and with none of the independents. They then proceeded with their elections! Watch this space.