Kinnock strives to make the Party 'fit to govern' or suitable for coalition. JANE KELLY outlines the issues that confront Marxists in the Labour Party. WHO WIlL WIN the next election? From all directions the talk is of a coalition. The Economist poses the qustion in relation to the current government crisis. With appealing honesty in the final paragraph article, they propose to use Thatcher as a bargining counter in discussions with the alliance: 'Mrs Thatcher is the best leader the Tory Party has on offer at present. If its members of parliament want to ditch her, they should wait until she has lost the next election. The Alliance might then help with the ditching, and still keep most of them in power'
The Euro-communists, in the pages of their ill-named theoretical journal, Marxism Today, approach the problem different angle. In 'Hung Parliament: the Choices For Labour', argues against principled (wrongly identified as the choice of the left), against forming a minority government, correctly assigned as the choice Kinnock has already staked out (but incidently also the option of the left), and in favour of coalition with the Alliance. So, the long campaign, argued in the pages of Marxism Today, of the need to build an anti-Thatcher alliance as the only way to defeat the Tories, bears its fruit - a popular front government for Britain. Though the article demands to cover up its pernicious strategy, the anti-working class nature of such government is spelt out by Sam Aaronovitch in the next article on the economic policies of a future Labour government. A Labour/Alliance coalition would be more of the same, but worse.
Rustin calls on Labour to commitment to full employment, to the right to work and to a strong public sector - all policies which Hattersley has rejected - in order to hold onto its 'core constituencies of class and region' developing 'more polycentric and diverse ways of speaking' for its constituencies. But talk of polycentrism can not disguise the nature of this Aaronovitch spells it out in all its gory detail. The trades unions will have to their own wages policy in order to hold back 20 • 'an irresistable wave of expectations and
of their post-election from a Michael Rustin opposition uses leftist a retain its emphasis). publicly while other Campbell who project. formulate their fight for liberation.
Ara militancy by all those who have been held possibilities of advance.' Such a government Barnett will be obliged to carry through substantial redistribution amongst working people. ' 2 (my comes of pseudo-feminism to include demands on combating low pay and achiev- ing equal pay for work of equal value, in the context of a wages policy, is particularly ob- noxious and continues the work of Bea argues that such im- provements for women can ony be achieved at the expense of the male working class. No wonder she also says that women should not look to the 'men's movement' for suport in moving
illinnock
Another version of this 'Pact That Could Sink The Tories' is penned by Anthony
Ton the 'Agenda' i page of The Guardian'. He uses leftist arguments but
Wto the same conclusions as Hobsbawm, Hall, Rustin et al. that Labour cannot win on its own, and so must make an clectoral pact to kick out Thatcher.
The openness with which Marxism Today and others are now discussing coalitionism as an electoral strategy, is of course made possible by the defeat of the miners' strike and the subsequent rightward shift of the majority of the labour movement, leaving the hard left relatively isolated. Although the Kinnock leadership deny any intention of
towards electoral pacts or postInternational, No. 3, March/April 1986
New realists Kinnock and Willis. election coalition, it is clear that their present policy of winning back the middle ground rom the Alliance, if it fails, will make coalition that much easier. It remains their fall back position.
It is ironic that in the present Tory crisis, resulting partly from their failure to deal with the economy, and with such authoritative journals like The Economist proposing coalition, the Kinnock eadership's response to people in struggle is to urge they wait for the return of a Labour government. Failing to take advantage of the government's great discomfort he calls on trade unionists fighting the vicious attacks on their right to organise to 'keep within the law'. In his pathetic attempt to make Labour 'fit to govern' he offers no support to miners victimised during the strike; no support to the printworkers sacked without any redundancy pay, to be replaced by scab workers organised by the EETPU 'bosses union'; no sympathy for black youth in the inner city; no support for local councillors facing surcharge and dismissal from holding public office for trying to stand up to ratecapping, or to Labour Party members who attempted to carry out party policy on local government.
Inside the Labour Party Kinnock continues his attack on left wing policies. The defeat of the miners has speeded this up, but it began well before the strike with the dropping of the commitment to withdraw from the FEC. Another era of bipartisanship on Ireland has been inaugurated, with the Anglo-Irish accord. And Hattersley, spokesperson on the economy, having steered through a thoroughly reforInternational, No. 3. March/April 1986
A New Partnershi A New Britain mist econornic policy at the last conference, has watered it down even further in public speeches; there is now no question of tackling unemployment as a priority - fighting inflation is the central task and the five million unemployed will have to wait, some of them for ever, as unemployment is here to stay.
The other element in Kinnock's road to making Labour 'fit to govern' is the attack
"The openness with which
Marxism Today and others
Ware now discussing
coalitionism as an electoral
strategy is made possible
by the defeat of the miners'
strike' on the left in the party. Ostensibly this is against the 'undemocratic' Militant; in reality it is an offensive agains the whole left, all those who refuse to allow Labour's policies to be jetisoned in the search for votes. The witchhunt is centralised by the enquiry into Liverpool District Party, and despite the minority report will lead to attempted expulsions of between ten and sixteen Liverpool members. There is also the campaign to withdraw the parliamentary whip from MPs Dave Nellist and Terry Fields, the refusal to endorse the reselection of Pat Wall in Bradford and in the constituencies the attacks on members of Black Sections, the Labour Committee on Ireland, and supporters of Labour Briefing.
Kinnock's strategy attempts to place class politics outside the parameters of debate, to make ther illegitimate, to recentre the party placing the hard left outside the boundary. A campaign which simultaneously tries to make Labour fit for government while preparing for possible coalition is seen in microcosm by the witchhunt in Exeter. Here, Briefing supporters have been charged with 'bringing the party into disrepute' because they publicly criticised the local city council for power sharing with the Alliance.
In this situation the soft left is very exposed. Livingstone, for example, claims to oppose expulsions from the party for political beliefs, but can also be heard calling for Hatton's dismissal from the deputy leadership of Liverpool Council, Blunkett votes for the enquiry into Liverpool, against the expulsion of a Sheffield councillor on the NEC, but moves his expulsion from the Sheffield Labour Group. The soft left/LCC project of 'saving Kinnock from the clutches of the right' is propelling them into support for expulsions, support for an increasingly right wing economic policy, support for a Labour government which is dropping every pretence of socialist policy, and which could casily be transformed into a coalition with the Alliance. In reality ' saving Kinnock from the right' is giving him a left cover — a cover that is increasingly flimsy, but a cover none the less.
How should Marxists counter all this? The SWP in Britain suggests building a revolutionary alternative to the mass party. and abstains from the battles which are bring fought out in the Labour Party. Making helpful suggestions from the sidelines is a 27
version of sectarianism. Militant's inside the Labour Party is sectarian too. Their inabilty to form united fronts with others is both sectarian and opportunist, placing the building of their own group above the needs of the left as a whole. This is nowhere more clear than in the fight against the witch hunt. In recognising that the attack against the Militant is an attack on the whole left there should be a united campaign to oppose it; but Militant insist on organising their own, separate, offensive.
The left in the party have to mount a fivefold counter-offensive. First, Marxism Today defeatism, we have to argue that the support disappeared, that far from the 'middle class' vote having defected to the SDP, white collar
Ware becoming increasingly proletarianised. The economic already meant that groups like the teachers and low paid servants are having to fight to maintain their living standards, and in doing so they turn to their trades unions
Secondly, against the Kinnock camp, and the New Realist right in the TUC, we must argue that the best way to build towards a Labour victory, is to fight the Tories now. The support for Labour increased during the miners' strike, as working class confidence was strengthened, despite the cowardly role of the Labour leadership. Similarly with current disputes. The leadership of the labour movement, both wings of it, should stand up and fight — fight for the Silentnight
the teachers, printworkers: Defending jobs and conditions now, outside the law if necessary, is the way to convince people that labour is committed to defending the interests of the working
Thirdly, confidence is incr ased organisation. The left in the Labrur Party and the trade union movement desperately need some sort of national organisation. one current or group can do this on its own, for none has the organisational strength or organisation like
which links groups and campaigns in the Labour Party can provide the beginnings of what is needed. But in order to consolidate its success so far, it must develop firmer roots in the constituencies as Parliamentary level, with MPs in Campaign Group
The fourth aspect is to stand firm against the witchhunt. Expelling socialists from the party is not going to produce a united party, is not going to build support in the clection and anyhow will not exclude socialist ideas. The use of accusations like 'bringing the party into disrepute' 'undemocratic practices' should be exposed for what they are — a way of getting rid of people whose ideas do not coincide with the present
Lastly the left must continue to counter attacks on policy questions. started by the Campaign Group pamphlet by Andrew Glyn on the economy should be continued. Unemployment is a key issue for most people and the left has to develop a
credible alternative both to Thatcher's monetarism and to the policies of the labour right. In particular we should integrate the relationship between the cconomy and oppressed groups. The first dratt is weak onthe role played by women and black people, the role of part-time work, capital's increasing use of homeworkers. A new draft will have to take account of the different, but equally important position such groups have in the economy. The next pamphlet planned by the Campaign Group is on NATO. In the face of likely changes to policy on unilateralism, the let should unilateralism but also point out the contradiction of this and remaining in NATO. It is common knowledge that any hint of Carios Augusto Guarita/Reflex Derek Hatton, victim of the witch hunt. dosing down US bases in Britain would result in attempts al economic sabotage. We should try and popularise withdrawal from NATO as the only possible way of ridding Britain of nuclear aris. The success of the anti-NATO campaign in Spain shows that this is possible. Similarly on Ireland: Livingstone, in the carly days of the GLA:. showed how it is possible to popularise radical policy on withdrawal and Irish unity. Despite the setbacks we should continur 1o develop and make popular the way to self-determination.
'a class struggle current will only arise if it is
fought for and organised'
The right to work and the right to choose ivhether or not to have children are two ideas which have been widely accepted thanks to
women's movement The proposal by
Tand the Labour Coordinating Committee to have a ministry for women's rights is therefore a good one and we should welcome it. We should bewarr of repeating
experience of Mitterrand's ministry,
proved incapable of fighting for in the face of the austerity programme introduced by the government. So in welcoming the idea we shouldalso place a series of polices such a ministry should carry out if Labour wins. Along with a woman's right to work and a woman's right to chose, we should put the right to equal pay for work
of equal value, the right of freedom from sexual harassment, free child care, the provision of women's health clinics with proper follow up procedures for cancer screening, the right to choose where and how to have a baby, the provision of to door transport for women alone at night on the agenda
The left should also be making sure that conference commitment to repeal racist immigration laws and the Nationality Act, also previously areas of bi-partisanship, is put into the manifesto for the election.
We have to say loud and clear there is no answer to the economic crisis for the working class other than socialist policies. The idea that you can replace a radical Tory government with one based on the consensus politics of earlier decades in economic situation is just pie in the sky. If the Labour Party continues its present course of dropping all policies with any hint of benefit to the working class about them, when in government it will have to mount a massive attack against the very people who voted them into office. It will be an attack, not just on the scale of the Wilson and Callaghan adminstrations, but much worse, because of the accelerated decline of industry and the plight of British capital.
Of course, there is no chance that Kinnock will follow our advice, and in all likelihood there will be no overall majority for any par-
after the election. Faced with a hung parliament we should remain adamantly opposed to coalition, demanding Labour form a minority government and fight to carry out its policies. In the present economic climate, however, it will be very difficult for Labour
Tout even very watered down policies. What happens after that is open to conjecture. It is possible, even likely, that the anti-working class policies Labour will be forced to introduce will provoke an open revolt in the ranks of the labour movement This will probably not be as circumscribed as the revolt in the party after the defeat of 1979, when the attempt to make the leadership more accountable concentrated on con stiturional changes like the clection of the leadership and resclection of MPs. The militants of the movement will have gone
the political experience of the miners' strike, with the education it provided on the role of the state. the police, the courts and not least the Labour Party and trade umon leaders in betraying the strike. If and when Kinnock capitulates lo the demands of national and international capital, there is likely to be enormous disaffection throughour the working class. We should be careful not to ser the development of a strong left wing current as an invitable consequence. Such a left, a class struggle current like the Minority Movement of the 1920s, will only arise if it is consciously fought for aand organised. the Minority Movement was organised and led by the Communist Party, so today any such developments will be the result of the con scious leadership by Marxists in the Labour and trade union movement. Footnotes 1. The Economist, 15th-21st February 1986. 2. Marxis Today, February 1986. 3. The Guardian, 24th February 1986.
International, No. 3. March/April 1986