Aribalt must say no to Leeds purge of SWP Our stand against exclusions: SO 39 Dave Packer N Alan Thornett and paigns. But his description of the roots of those divisions are to say the least highly controversial with ick Long's letter political number of issues (left) raises involved other Socialist Party (SP). which are cen- Nor is it true to say that all rent debate around the build- tral to the cur- the Lewisham alliance share his independents ing of the Socialist Alliances.
view. The picture he paints focuses of the SP and the indepenattention on their political character, and the need for dents working in harmony whilst the rest simply doing people from diverse parts of their own thing is a rather within them if they are to be WOrK together grotesque caricature from all. developed into an effective aCCOuLLo.
As welcome as the recent alternative victory of Sam Dias in the Pepys by-election is, and it is It is unfortunate, however, very welcome that Nick Long has decided fact is that the Socialist Party disgraceful imposed her as a candidate witch hunt against the SWP on the Lewisham Socialist The Leeds Left Alliance (LLA) has denied members of the SWP the right to be full members of A the LLA and have debarred office within the Alliance standing for as a as anything other than as a Nick Long euphemistically candidate of the SP - i.e.
this anti-demo- under the SP's cratic outrage as "defining the political boundaries" of rubric Alternative/lan Page team. of LLA. Blair How does that want harmony? "define the political bound- to local democracy? Ör any aries" of the LP by drum- kind of democracy? ming out the left. Such an Unfortunately it reflects a action by Milbank would long and dishonourable tracondemned by dition Britain - that democracy is a 1S not an very good thing as long as it Socialist Alliances, to be dis- PYTra for the patch'. For socialists there is does not interfere with 'our carded when there are a few a higher principle than simscores to settle or a few revo- ply being in the best position socialists to be to get votes in a local elecnobbled. It is an integral part tion. of the Alliances or they are And this is not the only place where You can't fight the right- imposed a candidate - or prewing with the bureaucratic sented an ultimatum as to An SLP mark II would methods of the right-wing. go who it would be, amounts to the same thing.
Long invokes his Alliance public meeting in At ICCCIl experiences in the Lewisham Walthamstow the SP speaker Socialist Alliance to justify Simon Donovan announced his defence of the indefensi- from the platform that he would be standing in Leyton Yes, the Lewisham Alliance whatever anyone else said, is a divided Alliance, and and the Socialist Alliance this has led to divided camwould simply have to decide whether to support him. or …OL. It is not surprising that all the there are divisions in the organisations Lewisham Alliance under than the these conditions. It was a credit to the others in the Alliance, organisations and the individuals, that decided to support the SP candidacy, even though they had been given no say in deciding the candidate. This all flows from the unilateral declaration of the SP (in The they would stand eighteen of their own candidates in predetermined constituencies. This is irrespective indeed, the views of any local SA group in those areas, either now or the future one any kind of alliance - even a t the meeting to federal one. adopt a candidate practice borrowed she flatly refused, Blairism. Nick Long does member not refer to these impositions • of the SP, to stand or give his view on them.
Nor does Nick Long make the case for his assertion that election the SWP was attempting to take over the Leeds promote This is because What happened such case exists. But in any case, if a judgement is to be made about the conduct of the SWP in the Alliances, it needs to be made on the basis on the tar-lett in of their general practice.
In our experience they have not attempted to over alliances, even in places where they have the numbers to co co. n the contrary in mOS! (though not all) they have been careful to involve the sP have independents and organisations, and which sought be in minority, often minority. They know that a successful SA intervention will build their organisation, of because of resources, both human and material, that they will bring to it on the ground. But there is nothing wrong with that.
The whole left will grow if we are successful in building the alliances to their potential in the present period. Nick Long should realise that without organisations like the SWP involved (and the SP as well) there they will be no credible general electoral intervention, certainly not one which could meet current requirements. The rest of the left, those organised and those independent, are BIOL strong that enough to do it.
Like the SP and the L LLA, Nick Long of the talks about "the moves towards centralisation" arising out of the Coventry conference at the end of September which anoiner from As the ISG has argued previMously (SO38), this is a gross misrepresentation of what took place at Coventry, and it is being systematically promoted by the SP In fact Coventry produced Left an extremely federal election protocol, which put restrictions on local alliances. They are to stand under a different name to the Alliances whilst being a part of the Socialist Alliances if they want to. They can have their take own local profile and local demands and the candidates make clear their political affiliations. This has been made clear to places the LLA repeatedly by the officers of the Alliance nationally, in case there is any problem of interother pretation. have In fact the Coventry protoa small Leeds Left Alliance has itself, if the way its executive was able to act against the SWP was an indication of its The powers.
And, by the way, the Green Network AGM actually voted for affiliation to the Socialist Alliances, not
adopted a protocol for the general election
col creates a far less cen- tralised structure than the