06.12.2007

Which way for PCS left?

Dave Vincent, secretary of the Greater Manchester ministry of justice branch of the Public and Commercial Services union, gives his view on this weekend's conference of PCS Left Unity

The December 8 PCS Left Unity national conference in Manchester will debate policy motions in readiness for the PCS annual delegate conference in May 2008. Next Saturday will also discuss nominations for the Left Unity national committee and the Left Unity slates for the April-May 2008 union executive elections and TUC delegations.

There would appear to be 12 Left Unity regions that have nominated candidates and 13 that have submitted motions for the conference, but, as many regions have agreed on the same nominations and motions, in reality it is only a few individuals who start the ball rolling. Most members of the newly created PCS Independent Left, having split from Left Unity last year, will not be at this Saturday's conference and therefore the dominant force, the Socialist Party, will get an easy ride. More about the Independent Left later.

All the Left Unity officers, including editor and scrutineer, are unopposed. There are, however, 16 nominations for five national committee places. Four of those nominated have the support of nine regions, including two who are longstanding members of the SP and a third who is a well known supporter of Morning Star. Two further nominees, with three regions supporting them, are members of the Socialist Workers Party, while another comrade has the support of three regions despite not being in any party, it seems. The remaining candidates have just one region each supporting them, so it looks like the SP will retain overall control of the Left Unity national committee, with the SWP forming the next biggest left bloc - which mirrors the situation on the PCS NEC.

There are 34 nominations for 30 places for the Left Unity slate for the PCS NEC. However, if a motion to continue the electoral pact with the PCS Democrats is carried, the places on the NEC slate reserved for Left Unity will be reduced to 22. So 34 nominations for 22 places - quite a contest. Not quite! It just so happens that there are 22 nominations with the support of between nine and 11 out of the 13 regions. Obviously then, the presumption is that the supposedly 'temporary' pact with the PCS Democrats will remain in place even before the motion is debated. Most of the 22 are SP, SWP and Scottish Socialist Party members, along with a few trusted non-party comrades.

Policy motions

There are 22 motions submitted, some covering the same subject. There are three on the current major national PCS campaign against job cuts, the two percent pay limit and compulsory redundancies. One simply states that job cuts mean more work for staff left behind, so it calls for vacancies to be filled - no mention of any industrial action if the employer refuses! Another does call for industrial action - to oppose new museum staff being denied civil service status by being placed in 'trading companies'.

However, the main motion on the current national campaign calls for ongoing support to the NEC in its efforts to build links with other public sector unions with a view to joint industrial action, where possible. It also urges more stress on the PCS 'Make your vote count' campaign, under which civil servants may threaten not to vote Labour in future elections (it really is that vague, I'm afraid). There is no open encouragement for PCS members to look for (let alone vote for) any left alternative, such as the SP, SSP, Solidarity, Respect (versions one or two), independents, Greens, etc.

So there is no clash of motions over the effectiveness or otherwise of the national campaign so far and no criticism of the NEC or of its left leadership. Nor is there mention either of paid selective action or of all-out action (industrial action has been suspended until 2008 in response to the promise of "meaningful talks with the cabinet/treasury". There may well be last-minute emergency motions on this question - or there may not.

There are also three motions on the alliance with the PCS Democrats. All support its continuation with slight variations.

The first motion regrets the creation of the Independent Left and the likelihood of two left slates in April-May. It calls for IL to rejoin Left Unity. But it seems many leading lights would rather strike a deal with non-socialist opportunists like the PCS Democrats than with the breakaway Independent Left.

The second motion expresses calls for a review of this 'temporary pact'. The movers clearly have mild reservations over whether Left Unity has shared values with the PCS Democrats (it does - electoralism). Or perhaps the alliance is a popular front, they ponder. Some debate might be possible here then? The third motion wants fewer PCS Democrats from one department on the common slate.

There are four (!) motions complaining about under-representation of minority groups on union committees and calling for more reserved seats for more categories. PCS currently has two reserved seats on its executive for black (BME) members, but none for women (who constitute 60% of PCS membership, but only 30% of the left NEC), disabled, young or LGBT members.

Two motions call on Left Unity to work with other coordinating and campaigning bodies such as the SWP's Organising for Fighting Unions, the RMT-sponsored National Shop Stewards Network (to which conference is being asked to affiliate), Public Service, Not Private Profit and Keep Our NHS Public. Also the Campaign for a Marxist Party (I'm joking about that one). The other motion calls for more involvement with trades councils and for activists within unions affiliated to the Labour Party to campaign for cutting off union funds. Promising?

On international questions, one motion calls for Left Unity members to participate in Hands Off the People of Iran. No affiliation yet, but this is a good start. Only one region is proposing support for Hopi, but hopefully it will be carried. Another one calls for opposition to any attack against Iran or the extension of the 'war on terror'. There is also a bland motion calling for the promotion of a green agenda.

Finally, on union organisation matters, there is a call for the election rather than appointment of more PCS full-time officers and the linking of their pay to that of our members. Quite a number of unelected, full-time officer posts in PCS (and some other unions) have gone to Socialist Party members after 'open competition', so the debate on this might be interesting.

Independent Left

Having seen no report in the Weekly Worker of its September founding conference, I wonder what is going on with the Independent Left? I hear there were about 30 at the launch conference (is that good for a new faction just starting out?). Subsequently there was another Independent Left meeting on November 24 in Manchester. I understand IL will again try to stand as large a slate for the NEC as it can next spring - despite its heavy defeat in the 2007 elections, where Left Unity actually got more votes than the previous year despite the split.

From the little I have seen, the main reasons for splitting from Left Unity appear to be: a major disagreement over how much (and what type of) industrial action PCS should be calling in the national campaign over job cuts, low pay and compulsory redundancies; not being awarded enough NEC slate places; and the stifling domination of the SP over Left Unity. Though the Independent Left comrades have my sympathies in these areas and I may join them eventually, for now I (and, I suspect, many others) have some difficulties.

It is true that arguing against the preferred policies and candidates of the SP within Left Unity was a thankless and seemingly pointless task, given the majority votes at conferences the SP and its allies can command. However, previously Independent Left was able to reach more non-aligned LU members than it can now.

After losing the NEC elections and its two NEC places in May, IL was invisible at the PCS national conference two weeks later. You cannot build if no-one sees your leading activists in action on conference floor.

But my criticisms are more far-reaching.

l Firstly, Independent Left's stated values seem just as economistic as those of the faction it left! Will this change if IL grows?

l Secondly, the split does nothing to promote united action across the public sector. Other unions (usually affiliated to the Labour Party) are avoiding rather than seeking such a united approach and that certainly is not the fault of the PCS NEC, which has been calling for common action for years.

l Thirdly, a fair number of IL members remain in the Labour Party - the party whose government is responsible for the attacks that both Left Unity and the Independent Left are fighting.

l Finally, being (thus far) so small, yet standing most of your members for the NEC smacks of substitutionism. There is no point winning control of the NEC if you do not have enough members within the rank and file to deliver the action you think is necessary! You will simply lose ballots for stronger action - and what a setback that would be.

I said before this year's NEC elections that Independent Left should stand only the same number of candidates as the PCS Democrats who were part of the 'Democracy Alliance' electoral pact (ie, eight NEC places, plus the vice-presidency). That should apply again next year. It would enable those Left Unity supporters who do not like this pact (and there are quite a few) to vote against PCS Democrats and for Independent Left without jeopardising the chances of LU. It would give IL a better chance of getting some NEC places - and that in turn would put the current 'temporary' pact under pressure and allow the SP strategy to be challenged. The IL would be viewed as more credible. However, I fear, like this year, I will be ignored again.

Hopefully CPGBer and IL founder-member Lee Rock will provide some answers to my reservations - not to mention report on IL's intentions on this and other matters.

There is also a broader question, however, that all activists should consider: when should a minority stay and fight within a grouping such as Left Unity despite constantly losing the vote and therefore being tied to failed tactics; and when is it better to leave to build an alternative? In LU everything was controlled by the dominant groupings, who were able to determine the outcome of conferences beforehand and render debate pointless. On the other hand, IL has more freedom and genuine debate, but it is a much smaller grouping with even less influence.