08.01.2004
Keep quiet about the 's' word
The Socialist Alliance executive has reneged on the decision taken in December to engage with the Respect Unity Coalition on the basis of fighting "for it to adopt a working class and socialist platform". Marcus Ström reports.
The Socialist Alliance executive has reneged on the decision taken in December to engage with the Respect Unity Coalition on the basis of fighting "for it to adopt a working class and socialist platform".
At its January 3 meeting the executive passed a motion which sees the draft declaration of the Unity Convention as a "good basis for the public launch of Respect". In deciding against moving any amendments which would place it on a firm socialist and working class footing, the NEC is acting not only against the decision taken at the December executive, but in contravention of the resolution on left unity agreed at the annual conference last May.Our conference decision states that any new organisation the Socialist Alliance enters and supports will be "open, inclusive, democratic and, of course, socialist".
Alan Thornett, the author of that resolution, has repeated this formula many times since. He has, for example, written that the Socialist Alliance "proposes to keep an open mind on the organisational form that could emerge from such discussions. It could be the alliance as it is, a relaunched alliance, or a new organisation entirely. The alliance would insist only that any new formation is open, inclusive, democratic and, of course, socialist" (International Viewpoint June 2003). There is no "of course" about it now.
In order to square this circle the majority on the executive committee, led by SA chair Nick Wrack, secretary Rob Hoveman and comrade Thornett himself, are having to pretend that the draft declaration of the Unity Coalition is, in fact, socialist. Not surprisingly, there is defensiveness all round. Comrade Wrack represents the SA on the interim Unity Coalition committee. He did not return any of my calls this week seeking information after its meeting on Sunday January 4. It is not hard to fathom why.
At the January 3 executive meeting, comrade Wrack (non-aligned, but in close orbit around the SWP) declared the draft document to be "implicitly" socialist. For his part comrade Thornett (International Socialist Group) thought it was "essentially" socialist. While the Socialist Workers Party's Rob Hoveman insisted it was "absolutely" socialist. However, though voting for the Thornett motion, comrade Will McMahon (non-aligned, but again close to the SWP) at least had the honesty to admit that the draft document was merely "leftwing", not socialist.
The document to be put before the January 25 founding convention of the Unity Coalition contains many demands and formulations that socialists can support and which are even inspired by socialist thinking. Nick Wrack is particularly proud of his own addition to the end of the document which reads: "We want a world in which the democratic demands of the people are carried out; a world based on need, not profit; a world where solidarity rather than self-interest is the spirit of the age."
While admirable, such sentiments are far too vague to be clearly identifiable as socialist, let alone of the genuine, working class, variety. There is no role for our class in carrying out any of the demands put forward. And there is no explicit call for a different social and political system. At the same time, such formulations are no worse than the original politics of the Network of Socialist Alliances (forerunner of the SA) prior to the adoption of People before profit. But we are, however, being pushed backwards politically.
Will this lead to the flooding in of the masses, as the SWP hopes? Clearly comrades Hoveman et al intend keeping the SA on ice during the latest turn as a fall-back option. Feebly, comrade Hoveman said that many people had trouble with the word 'socialist'. Comrade Wrack said that the content of the declaration was not as important as "getting it off the ground and getting a success in June". When asked to describe what he meant by success, comrade Wrack mused that George Galloway's election to the European parliament could be one benchmark.
Pursuit of electoral success at the expense of political principle has a name in our collective Marxist tradition: parliamentary cretinism. A number of motions moved by the newly formed Democracy Platform of the Socialist Alliance fell or were defeated. A motion calling for the Unity Coalition to be a "working class alternative to New Labour" and stating that elected representatives of the coalition would only accept a skilled worker's wage fell with seven votes for (Marcus Ström, Lesley Mahmood, Steve Godward, Martin Thomas, John Fisher, Mandy Baker, Glynn Robbins), with nine voting against and two abstentions (Jim Jepps and Heather Cox).
Comrade Hoveman asked what we would do if leading Socialist Campaign MPs wanted to join but were not prepared to accept a workers' wage. Clearly, for him there would be no problem.
For working class partisans there is a problem. The Democracy Platform motion committing the coalition to fight for open borders and an end to immigration laws fell on a tied vote of seven each with four abstentions. Likewise, a motion calling for a democratic selection of electoral lists and candidates fell on a tied vote. A motion which said that the SA and its representatives to the interim committee would insist that the formation of the coalition would be "open, democratic and transparent" was defeated, since it was argued this was current practice (four votes for: Marcus Ström, Lesley Mahmood, Steve Godward, Martin Thomas; 10 votes against and four abstentions). The final proposals from the Democracy Platform fell with four votes for and 13 against. These were: a motion to be put to the convention describing what we mean by socialism - ie, the "working class organising to liberate itself from the rule of profit and create its own democracy"; and an amended version of the draft declaration which would have inserted the key demands of People before profit, including a change in the initials of Respect, with R standing for 'republicanism'.
All these defeated motions put by the Democracy Platform were drawn from existing Socialist Alliance policy. Comrade Rob Hoveman more than once raised a straw man. His argument that we should not put ultimatums to the Unity Convention and that we should not walk away if it did not accept the politics of People before profit missed their target. The Democracy Platform is not putting forward ultimatums. There is no intention of walking away from Respect if our socialist and working class principles are not accepted.
To the extent that the Unity Coalition organises and speaks for that element of the anti-war movement that wants to challenge New Labour, then socialists want to be with it and engage with it constructively. However, we must be open with our politics. Comrade Hoveman stated that only amendments that added to the declaration should be supported. Presumably, amendments calling for no immigration controls and representatives on a workers' wage detract from the document for the Socialist Workers Party.
It has now emerged that there will be one amendment allowed per organisation at the January 25 convention. During the debate, comrade John Fisher, at times close to the SWP, made the point that having George Galloway as the figurehead of the coalition was problematic, as not everyone was comfortable working with him. Further, he asked just who the people on the interim committee represented. Given that Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT, and Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the PCS civil servants' union, had not put their names to the declaration, comrade Fisher said that the coalition was severely weakened, as these were the people he was most interested in getting on board. He warned against the frustration that was natural, given that the entire left had failed to grow out of the anti-war movement.
Comrades from the SWP, including Rob Hoveman, Jeanie Robinson and Simon Joyce, argued against any direct affiliation of the Socialist Alliance to Respect. Comrade Hoveman said that the SA "did not have enough coherence to act inside the coalition". Whereas comrade Will McMahon wants the SA to be the "socialist current" within the "left coalition", the SWP clearly has other ideas.
It fell to Simon Joyce to play the part of SWP member provided by central casting. He said how very excited he was about the prospects of the coalition, predicting that for every member of a small left group there will be 100 other people who will join. He added that our biggest danger was isolation. However, in that context, he was "worried about reading bits of paper" (like motions and amendments submitted by the SA's Democracy Platform). They are off-putting. Not that he objects to reading, oh no: he assured us that he had lots of books at home.
Frustrated with the political direction of the Socialist Alliance, comrade Steve Godward acted impulsively at times, moving an ill-advised no confidence motion against Nick Wrack as SA chair. It only received the support of Martin Thomas of the AWL. Alan Thornett said during debate that the "name of the game" was how to build upon the sentiment and passion of the anti-war movement and channel it into a political organisation.
I could not agree more. However, junking socialist principles in a desperate bid for parliamentary advantage is a well-worn path to disaster. At the last minute, comrade Thornett discovered three bullet points from People before profit he wanted to add to the declaration: for a minimum wage of £7.40 an hour; for a 35-hour working week; and for taxing the rich. These were deferred to the national council on January 17, as these self-same amendments had just been defeated in the Democracy Platform motions.
It now falls upon the Democracy Platform to take principled socialist and working class amendments to the national council and to the Unity Convention on January 25. In other business, the SA voted to convey its congratulations to Chris Flood, newly elected Socialist Party councillor in Lewisham, London. It agreed the agenda for the SA national council that takes place on January 17 in London. This will be: Unity Coalition, methods of election to the SA executive and campaigning against the council tax. It was agreed that Stuart Richardson get the go-ahead to establish a Socialist Alliance education policy group and a media development proposal from Will McMahon and Mandy Baker also got the green light. A proposal from comrades McMahon and Baker to commit the SA to campaign against council tax and for an income-related service tax was noted and agreed that it be decided upon at the national council.
The campaign is based upon a similar one launched by the Scottish Socialist Party. The deadline for motions to the SA annual conference is February 13. Amendments must be in by March 1. Finally, the report of the appeals committee on the request to expel Danny Thompson and Jane Clarke was noted. The appeals committee has said that the two should not be expelled, there should be no formal hearing and the Bedfordshire Socialist Alliance branch need to be relaunched. There was no opposition to these findings.