the Socialist Alliances.
The protocol was, however, sharply controversial, particularly with the Socialist Party. The final outcome was a compromise, but it does appear to represcil a sululture which all the organisations present could accept and work with even if they remain unhappy with aspects of it.
The sharp debate on structures, though, represented a deeper division the character of the Alliance we are setting out to build. Would it be an Alliance of organisations and individuals seeking as far as possible to present themselves as a part of a common project, and prepared to subordinate, to a degree, their individual identities to strengthen the common identity?
Or would it simply be an electoral arrangement between competing organisations, which would go on putting their own identity, and own interests, first in the toral nact. traditional way?
around.
T here were many shades of opinion expressed on these questions, but it seemed that the Socialist Party were the only current to consistently defend the latter view. Their speakers intervened to claim (astoundingly) that the officers proposed protocol would create 'over-centralisation' to the extent that it was only appropriate for a full blown political party! This is an irrational view in relation either to the original proposals or to the policies eventually adopted [see box].
All that was being proposed was the mınimum structure capable presenting united and coherent campaign, with an election committee at national level, a high degree of autonomy at local level, and with the political organisations involved free to make clear their own identity and pro- forward.
ject their own politics.
To argue that this represents the structure of a political party is absurd. But it is true that the protocol from the officers represented the formation of a political alliance rather than simply an electoral block.
We are trying to build a national political current.
_ heretore certain mınimum criteria are necessary. This, in our view, is the only way to mount an effective campaign and the only way a genuine convergence can be maintained and developed.
The Socialist Party meanwhile have got themselves in a twist. The stance they have conditions to a private employer under New Labour's Private Finance Initiative this and simply be an elec- the It is an extraordinary turn Was They still call for a new party of course, but it is simply propaganda stripped of all content. We must have a new party - but the Socialist Alliances, Which are the promising development in that direction for a very long time, are becoming too much like one. Suddenly. the Alliances are not the stituencies? hasis for such a new partv.
But if the Alliances are not H the best development in that direction to date, maybe the SP could tell us what is?
As far as the International Group is con- that the cerned, we agree with the SP on the need for a new party, and we think the Socialist Workers Party are wrong not to address the issue of the able situation. longer term development of the Alliance we are building.
But the way the SP are conducting themselves on this blunts the debate with the SWP rather than taking it The SP presented their position at the conference as a defence of the democracy of the Alliances. In fact the logic of what they say Is nol defence of democracy in the Alliances, but a threat to it.
left currents The SP have made it clear both at the meeting of the SA officers and in a recent edition of The Socialist, that they intend standing 18 candidates in the general election. They gave the officers the 18 named constituencies a moral issue. where they intend to do this.
This was presented not as an aspiration - which would In Alliances will prove to be response to the discussion it greater than the sum of its 'clarified' that they individual parts. meant SP candidates stand- No one is arguing that any ing under the name of the one should drop their politics or stop arguing for them This is very welcome. But or stop putting out their own it only resolves one problem, material. We will certainly not the other. If the democ- commuc to put racy of the local alliances is views. The issue is how that to mean anything, how can is done within the paramethe SP guarantee having SP ters of a united campaign. members as SA candidates in The final debate at the conpre-determined ference was on what would COconstitute the election committee, the ow can local would run the election camalliances be paign. formed in those There were three proposals: the existing constituencies on the hasis committee, which we concandidate has sidered too already been predetermined existing Liaison Committee, by the SP? All everyone else which is the officers plus one has to do is rally round! It delegate from every affiliated would create an unaccept- organisation;
extended officers' commitIt is not surprising that the tee, with one from each of Socialist Party wants to min- the main political organisaimise any national develop- TIONS plus four ment or autnoritauve struc- dents. tures for fear that it may The ISG limit their room for manoeu- third option, but we have no vre. They reject any national problems with the outcome structure or protocol which which was can determine anything to Committee proposed by the do with "their" seats. SP. It will need to reorganise This is the sort of attitude itself to do the job, but we which will prevent Socialist have no doubt that that will Alliances developing into happen. genuine broad organisations The conference did not and restrict them to no more resolve all the problems of building an effective election than a pact between existing intervention.
It is an attitude which It did not tackle one issue needs to be rejected. The SAs which we regard as crucial: must be built on the most not standing open and democratic basis Labour candidates. This is possible, with a full input an issue on which the SP -from everyone participating and others at local level. And this is not Labour is now a straight capThe more italist party - will not agree. broad based and united the There is a lot of work to be Alliances are, the more effec- done before a credible elecIN JULY this year the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) published their report The trafficking and smuggling of refugees: the end game in European asylum policy? The report is an in depth analysis of human trafficking and smuggling and concludes that existing policies are part of the problem not the solution. "Refugees are now forced to use illegal means if they want to access Europe at all. The direction of current policy risks not so much solving the problem of trafficking but rather ending the right of asylum in Europe, one of the most fundamental of all human rights. "Any comprehensive approach that tackles trafficking and smuggling successfully out our requires legal and safe migration opportunities for all refugees, as well as necessary enforcement measures.. "As international policy currently stands, if European governments were ever successful body which in stopping organised illegal migration ..they would have ended European asylum policy as we know it." officers' The final effect of criminalisation of irregular migrants who narrow; the later claim asylum is the public, as well as official, perception that their claims must be bogus otherwise they would not and an enter clandestinely. And, once labelled as 'bogus', there is almost no way for asylum seekers to exonerate themindepenUse ves. The UNHCR report makes a supported the number of useful proposals: "it is misleading in the extreme to continually refer to people, the Liaison who are likely to be refugees, as 'aliens, "bogus asylum-seekers', "clandestines' or 'illegal immigrants'. All parties must be clear and consistent in the language they use in order to overcome the large amount of public confusion and mistrust on issues of against left who think asylum policy." "It is ethically indefensible for member states to promote human rights in their foreign policy if the right to asylum is negated by pre-entry border control measures. "All migrants have human rights, regardless of their immigration status, their legality or whether they are refugees or not. ....
"European Governments have a basic obligation to protect all irregular migrants from racism and actions of discrimination. As part of this, governments have a duty not to accommodate or settle refugees in situations where they risk such persecution.
'There is a duty not to portray refugees who used an illegal means of entry as being in any way criminal.' Unfortunately, this report comes in the aftermath of the EU meeting in Tampere last year where the foundations for a common asylum policy have already been set out.
The Conclusions from the meeting outline the new approach to asylum and immigration, and one of them (22) urges the establishment of a common EU visa issuing office as an answer to illegal immigration and trafficking.
The idea is to create a multidisciplinary approach to immigration and asylum which would combine efforts in foreign policy, development and aid and trade with 'migration management' "United for Intercultural Action" has documented more than 2,000 deaths as a result of Fortress Europe and the human smuggling business is booming.
As far as European policymakers are concerned if any-. one wants to be considered a 'genuine', asylum seeker they will have to parachute themselves into Europe, because no
IF YOU WITA US UNECO Dudley hospital workers are on a fifth round of solid strikes against the loss of jobs and working