17.09.2008
What sort of representation?
Ben Lewis reports on the launch of a new trade union coordinating group at a fringe meeting at last week's Trades Union Congress
One of the most interesting fringe meetings I attended at last week’s TUC was undoubtedly the launch of a new group in order to “coordinate the campaigning activities of our trade unions on the key issues facing our members and to give our unions a new and stronger representative voice in parliament”.
The packed meeting was chaired by John McDonnell MP and addressed by the general secretaries of the unions who had sponsored it - Bob Crow of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers Union; Jeremy Dear of the National Union of Journalists; Matt Wrack of the Fire Brigades Union; and Mark Serwotka of the Public and Commercial Services union.
Although each union already has its own parliamentary group, this new formation does show that these non-Labour-affiliated unions are starting to look for ways to politically cohere, linking up with comrade McDonnell in order to “coordinate … parliamentary representation on a number of key policy objectives”.
Groundbreaking
These objectives are not particularly groundbreaking. The group calls for “opposition to the privatisation of public services”, coupled with “returning already-privatised sectors/services back into public ownership with adequate investment and funding”. It seeks to win the enactment of the Trade Union Freedom Bill, “oppose cuts in pay and pensions”, secure a “decent minimum wage” and properly negotiated wage settlements, whilst at the same time campaigning for “the promotion of global justice, a sustainable environment and internationalism”.
Of course, such phrases are nothing new - we have seen them resurface time and time again in the platitudes of numerous ‘unity’ projects - particularly the vague talk of “global justice” and “a sustainable environment”.
The meeting pointed to the increasing frustration with the New Labour project and the consequent need for some sort of political alternative - “nobody is speaking up for trade unionists”, as John McDonnell put it. He mentioned the gloomy prospect of a Conservative victory at the next election, something which hung over the TUC like a bad smell.
He was the only speaker who spoke of changing the Labour Party though. Indeed, as the meeting was billed as one to “ensure that the concerns and aspirations of trade unionists are given a new and stronger coordinated political voice”, the contributions of the other speakers did highlight some tension between McDonnell’s continuing attachment to the Labour Party and what the other speakers understood by a “political voice”.
The union speakers appeared to be looking to develop a campaign like the PCS Make Your Vote Count initiative, which has already made an appearance in some local elections. It essentially marks a shift from auto-Labourism to selective tactical voting by asking electoral candidates their views on a number of priorities of the union movement and then publishing the answers to the whole of the membership. This in and of itself is not a bad thing, but clarity on what sort of political alternative these tactical decisions serve is needed.
This certainly was not forthcoming. Bob Crow - who was apparently instrumental in setting up this group - talked of campaigning “both industrially and politically” around its demands, which he referred to as the “bread and butter” of our class. For him, this was necessary because of New Labour’s disastrous record.
Although he praised comrade McDonnell’s stance and said that he would always campaign for him to be elected as a “personal decision”, it was clear that John would not be around for ever, and that he could well be replaced not by another leftwinger, but rather by a servile New Labour loyalist.
Although he made the point that the working class need a “campaigning political party”, he did not allude to what politics this would be based on beyond the usual questions of renationalisation, repealing the anti-union laws and opposing the destruction of industry. He contrasted this unity around “four or five points” with the “unity of the graveyard” in New Labour. He talked of us all wanting to go in the same direction - just some on a motorway and others on a B road. Yet, as history proves, in the absence of a clear political programme and strategy, these are not merely alternative routes, but actually lead to completely different destinations.
Continuing the theme of judging individual electoral candidates on their merits, comrade Crow argued that the forthcoming European Union elections can be made into a referendum on the whole EU project. This certainly exposed the flaw in the type of minimal unity envisaged - it cannot by definition be based on working class independence. Given Crow’s anti-EU stance, for example, he might well encourage his members to vote for non-working class parties - the nationalists and Greens spring to mind - purely on the basis of their opposition to the EU.
Perhaps even David Cameron’s envoy, Richard Balfe, who was sighted at the meeting, might have been encouraged by the possibility that trade unionists could be advised to vote for anti-EU candidates.
No alternative
Mark Serwotka’s speech also highlighted how simply voting for candidates based on their take on individual issues can be disastrous. He noted the futility of looking to make gains through Labour by pointing out that no Labour-affiliated union had backed McDonnell for leader, and lauded the PCS Make Your Vote Count campaign - there are “pretty good people” in other parties, he said.
He was not talking about left-of-Labour groups, however (I am sure that even comrade Serwotka has now given up on the Left Alternative and Scottish Socialist Party). The “litmus test” for political support should be policies, not the “colour of a political rosette”, he said - and went on to mention Plaid Cymru’s Leanne Wood and the SNP’s Alex Salmond. Salmond had assured trade unionists in Scotland of his opposition to nuclear weapons and redundancies.
The question of specifically working class political representation - a key issue facing our class - was not seriously taken up by any of the speakers. Although Jeremy Dear spoke of the need to fight for a society of “people, not profit” and Matt Wrack talked of dismantling the whole package of neoliberalism, as opposed to a few of its manifestations, none of the speakers presented any vision for actually getting there. Strategic roads were not even mentioned.
So, although the new formation will doubtless help to cohere a pro-union pressure group in parliament, it hardly points to a new form of working class representation. While comrade McDonnell was the sole speaker still talking of fighting within the Labour Party, he can hardly be blamed for staying in Labour in the absence of any alternative whatsoever outside it.
