22.03.2007
Step up pressure on union lefts to get John McDonnell on the ballot
If John McDonnell's name were to appear on the ballot paper to decide the Labour Party's new leader, that would bring with it the possibility of revitalising the entire left. However, thanks in large part to the cowardice of the left union bureaucrats, not enough Labour MPs have come under pressure to nominate him, says Jim Moody
Insiders say that he has only around half of the necessary 45 signatories so far. This is worrying and ought to be frankly admitted. Rank and file Labour Party members certainly do not need triumphalist assurances that everything is going swimmingly. They have had more than enough of spin and lies with New Labour.
War criminal Blair is likely to announce his resignation shortly after the May 3 elections. It would be a tragedy if fellow warmonger Gordon Brown were not opposed by a candidate who has adopted and maintained a principled position against the war and continued occupation of Iraq. Over the next few weeks every socialist must put motions to their union or Labour Party branch urging support for McDonnell and step up the pressure on the reluctant union tops and MPs.
John McDonnell has consistently been among the most leftwing of Labourites: in 1985, Ken Livingstone sacked him as his deputy on the Greater London Council after he called on 'red Ken' to defy the Tory government by illegally refusing to set a rate for the GLC. His record of voting against the government is second to none and he has consistently spoke up for workers in struggle. So a McDonnell campaign for the leadership would force all the candidates to at least nod in the direction of the left. It would mean that the interests of workers would once again feature in the accompanying debate.
Let us not forget that, while John McDonnell's campaigning bullet points are eminently supportable, they in no way suggest going beyond capitalism.
He is calling for:
l Withdrawal of British troops from Iraq.
l An end to privatisation.
l Abolition of student tuition fees and full support for comprehensive education.
l Restoration of civil liberties and trade union rights.
l A green energy policy based on renewable power sources.
l An increase in the basic state pension and immediate restoration of the earnings link.
Limited as they are, these demands unmistakably mark a challenge to the neoliberal bourgeois consensus. If, however, there were a real possibility of a McDonnell victory and the subsequent implementation of such a programme, there would be an immediate flight of capital and possibly an economic crash. In other words, since they are not part of a consistent internationalist, working class programme for power, such policies would ultimately spell disaster and defeat for our class.
They neither form part of a rounded working class programme nor even express, clearly and unambiguously, what our class actually needs. To give just one example, currently a minimum income of £300 a week is needed for an individual member of our class to reproduce themselves physically and culturally. Benefits, student grants and pensions should be set at such a realistic figure (from our point of view). But the bullet points talk only of "an increase" in pensions and abolition of student fees.
Equally importantly, apart from the minimalist "restoration of civil liberties and trade union rights", there is no emphasis on the crucial question for working class advance: democracy. There is no call to sweep away the monarchical system in favour of the democratic republic, for the accountability of all elected representatives and the replacement of the standing army with a people's militia.
Nevertheless, comrade McDonnell's platform provides an arena for our ideas to come into contention with social democratic reformist 'socialism'. For that reason, communists can support his campaign. But we would do the class no favours if we kept quiet about the political and organisational problems - quite the opposite.
Comrade McDonnell's interview in July 2006 was very upbeat: "Speaking to Guardian Unlimited ahead of his announcement to stand, the darling of the parliamentary left doubts he will have any difficulty in securing the endorsement of the 70-plus MPs necessary to formalise his leadership challenge once Mr Blair resigns."
Apart from the factual error (he only needs the votes of 44 MPs, plus his own, to get on the ballot), John is here portrayed as easily gaining sufficient support from his Westminster colleagues. After all, he does chair the parliamentary Socialist Campaign Group of around 35 MPs and it might be considered reasonable to assume that they at least would all back him. Wouldn't they?
The Guardian Unlimited interview has comrade McDonnell confidently saying: "MPs are coming to me. I am not putting anyone under any pressure. So people are spontaneously saying I am supporting you." Only a couple of months ago, he was singing the same tune, "We are in striking distance of getting onto the ballot paper" (The Guardian January 17). Of course, this strongly suggested that the 44 nominations were virtually in the bag.
Then, in late February, a setback. As expected, former minister and tired fake left Michael Meacher entered the leadership contest, eating into the already small pool of Labour left potential support. John wooed him, but he said no. Meacher had, of course, entered the fray without any hope of winning, but no doubt he anticipates some kind of recognition from the eventual winner. Meacher intends to show he heads a bloc of the sensible left which can be traded for a promise of a cosy position at some point - after all, even 20 or so nominations could send the right signal. In turn, those in Meacher's camp would hope to gather some crumbs under his patronage.
When asked about Meacher's challenge, John tried to put a brave face on it: "We have been expecting Michael's announcement for over nine months. It doesn't change things ... I have asked Michael to come on board with our campaign, but he's chosen to go his own way. Now let's have the debate on policies and the election and let the members decide" (BBC News February 22).
The fact that the McDonnell camp is still claiming that it has only around 22 Labour MPs shows that the campaign is floundering. There is no hiding it. Of course, they say more will come. Perhaps - but perhaps not. What is needed is a significant upping of the campaign from below. To say this - ie, to describe the facts as they are - is simply to pose what is necessary.
By contrast, some have managed to turn Meacher's announcement on its head and claimed that, far from being a blow, it has actually been a wonderful boost for McDonnell. Yes, because of Meacher's launch McDonnell got his voice on the media for a change. Yes, Meacher got angry messages from John for Leader supporters. Yes, Tony Benn, Christine Shawcroft (Labour Party NEC), Elaine Smith MSP and a range of the 'usual suspects', wrote a letter to The Guardian demanding that Meacher support the McDonnell campaign. But the problem of numbers stubbornly remains.
There is still mileage to be gained for the left in this Labour Party internal struggle. Indeed the Labour Party is a vital site of intervention. McDonnell has provided a focus and he can still be lifted onto the ballot paper. Brown should not simply be crowned. He ought to face a challenge from the left. However, we must not kid ourselves that everything is going our way. We must face the truth squarely in the face.
Showing where we are, at the symbolically important John for Leader rally in London on Saturday March 31, there will be 18 speakers. But apart from Jeremy Corbyn there is only one other who is an MP: John McDonnell himself. Of the other 16, many would call themselves veterans, people like Jim Mortimer and Alice Mahon are certainly no longer in the front line of active politics. There are, though, four trade union general secretaries advertised: Mark Serwotka of the PCSU, Matt Wrack of the FBU, Jeremy Dear of the NUJ, and Doug Nicholls of the Community and Youth Workers Union.
Valuable though their support is, once more we have on display the weakness of the John for Leader campaign. PCSU is not affiliated to the Labour Party. Nor is the FBU. In fact, the FBU disaffiliated in 2004. The NUJ is a small union and not affiliated to the Labour Party. Ditto CYWU "¦ except it is not small: it is minuscule. Winning support from RMT is also welcome. Though once again it is not affiliated. Because it backed Tommy Sheridan and the Scottish Socialist Party it got turfed out.
Where are the heavy hitters the John for Leader campaign needs? The big trade unions? Those who are affiliated to the Labour Party? Those who have dozens of sponsored MPs, whose arms can be twisted? Those who have a strong leftwing presence on their executives? Where is Amicus and TGWU? Where are the left talking Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley? And where are the Amicus and TGWU broad lefts?
Join the John4Leader campaign. Email info@john4leader.org.uk
or phone 020 7529 8296