Labour Party Conference 2001
An uneasy truce
It is sometimes said that there is a democratic deficit in Europe, but whatever the democratic deficiencies of the European Union, they fade into insignificance compared with a Labour Party conference. The Conference Arrangements Committee is firmly in the control of the right, and only too willing to do the bidding of the Millbank machine.
Matters likely to be controversial are carefully time-tabled in obscure slots when the TV cameras are turned off, only four "contemporary"; motions are allowed, and these usually have all meaning composited out of them. Apparently random selection of speakers produces a succession of carefully crafted sleep-inducing on-message contributions.
The reduction of this year’s conference by one day can have no possible justification. Arms fairs and fashion shows continued as normal. But in a situation where there was more to debate than in most years, the conference was curtailed.
Where war is being canvassed in defence of democracy, the first casualty was democracy. Even if there were no alternative to recalling parliament on the Thursday of conference week, it would have been perfectly feasible (even if unthinkable for Millbank) to continue without the MPs.
An emergency resolution arising from the events of September 11, moved by the FBU, was taken on Tuesday morning, although many other emergency resolutions that had been submitted were ruled out of order, for undisclosed reasons.
The FBU’s resolution condemned unreservedly "the brutal terrorist attack on the people of New York and Washington" and called on the British government "to maximise support for measures to bring to justice the perpetrators of these outrages and to isolate the terrorists by increasing efforts to resolve deep-seated political problems".
It also called for "renewed international efforts to tackle poverty, social deprivation, racism and attacks on human rights in many parts of the world."
It added that "the international community’s response to the dreadful events of September 11 must be measured and relevant.
"Indiscriminate bombing and other military assaults on poorly identified targets will only serve to increase violence by fuelling hatred and providing yet more martyrs for the terrorist cause".
The resolution was sufficiently general to attract the support of the NEC.
The contemporary motions which had been submitted fell into twelve groups by topic. Under existing arrangements, only four of these could be admitted for debate. The overwhelming votes of the unions in previous years has meant that only those contemporary motions supported by the unions have stood any chance of being selected.
Because of this, constituency delegates had been promised that some kind of weighting would be introduced, to enable topics supported by the CLPs to be debated.
To the chagrin of CLP delegates, the CAC reneged on this promise, and any new way of selecting contemporary motions was deferred to next year.
In the ballot to choose those topics to be debated, as a consequence, those motions supported by the big unions received between 15 and 21 per cent, while those supported by the CLPs got no more than 5 per cent. Burning issues like rail, education and the privatisation of the London Underground were thus excluded, and only public services, asylum, fairness at work and the Equitable Life fiasco were tabled.
The UNISON-endorsed composite on public services that emerged from intense negotiation and government lobbying was a complete dog’s breakfast, so feeble that it could be seconded by a constituency delegate who sang the praises of PFI, and carried on the recommendation of the NEC.
The GMB had wanted a much stronger motion (but were prepared to remit rather than push for a vote). The stand-alone resolution which appeared in their name, but was not debated, called for conference to oppose "government proposals for encouraging private companies to run state schools and plans to extend PFI beyond hospitals into primary care and social services."
The motion also noted that a recent survey commissioned by the GMB "shows that PFI is a pickpocket system that steals cash from NHS clinical budgets to pay fortunes to private sector contractors".
The Fairness at Work composite was proposed by the GPMU print union, and was very wide ranging.
Potentially, the demand made in one short paragraph was probably the most powerful, calling for the government to "carry out a fundamental review of existing employment laws with the object of ensuring that they are in line with ILO conventions."
If implemented, this would remove from the statute book many of the existing draconian anti-trade union provisions, and bring British law into line with international standards. The motion also welcomed the government’s withdrawal of its plans to impose charges for applications to Employment Tribunals, and added that "there should be no place for costs awards". Predictably, the GPMU agreed to remit the motion to the NEC.
The most hard-hitting of the contemporary resolutions, though, was without doubt the TGWU composite on Asylum Seekers.
It called upon the Home Secretary "to abolish the voucher system immediately and to restore cash payments to asylum seekers." It also called for an end to the detention of asylum seekers and for the reform of the dispersal system.
This was without doubt the issue on which the government was most vulnerable; not least because a review of the voucher system had been promised at last year’s conference, for which the initial consultation period had closed in December 2000, so far without any response from the government.
Debate was delayed until the last morning of the conference, to enable the maximum amount of arm-twisting and back room double-dealing. In the event, Bill Morris, on behalf of the TGWU, agreed to remit the motion, agreeing to "trust" Blunkett on vouchers, and in return for a promise that the use of prisons for asylum seekers would end, but not detention itself.
It seems that the Home Secretary is preparing to make some very limited concessions on asylum seekers, as part of an extensive attack on civil liberties, in bringing forward in the next month or so a package of measures on immigration, asylum and "anti-terrorism".
In the elections for next year’s Conference Arrangements Committee, only one candidate from the left slate – John Aitken of the TGWU – was elected: but he came top of the poll, indicating how important the trade union vote still is.
In the CLP section, both places were taken by government ministers, Yvette Cooper and Stephen Twigg, with 121,000 votes each, although it was by no means a walkover.
Left candidates Jenny Rathbone and John Cryer got 95,000 and 62,000 votes respectively. But in the election for the National Consti-tutional Committee the left achieved an unexpected success, when Rosina McRae beat the right-wing candidate by 114,000 votes to 97,000.
The conference remained subdued throughout, almost as if clapping too loudly or coughing would be seen as a mark of disrespect for all those who died on Sept-ember 11.
But the mood began to lift as the week went on, as delegates started to realise that however tragic the events in New York, the domestic agenda, particularly the privatisation drive, would go on nevertheless.
There is a great deal of disillusionment, discouragement, doubt and dissent at the base of the party, and had it not been for September 11, the government would have had a much rougher ride at this year’s conference.
Ministers cynically manipulated the circumstances, larding their speeches even as late as the last day of conference with routine references to New York, as if the delegates were in danger of forgetting.
Arguments suppressed in the conference hall found life at the fringe meetings. The "Take back the Track" meeting called by ASLEF was very well attended – Gwyneth Dunwoody could have had an alternative career as a stand up comedian.
Several hundred delegates attended a packed meeting on keeping the public services public, jointly organised by the T&G, Unison and the GMB.
The annual Tribune rally attracted about four hundred to hear excellent speeches by Tony Benn, George Galloway and Mick Rix. Roy Hattersley had been billed to appear, but pulled out rather than be associated with an anti-war platform.
Next year’s conference will surely be different, but much depends on the ability of trade unionists between now and then to hold their leadership to account.
The rash of remittances shows that the bureaucracies that run the big unions still prefer secret negotiations in the corridors of power to standing firmly in defence of the their own policies and the interests of their members. If the Blair agenda is to be held in check, the trade unions hold the key.
Al Christian is the pseudonym of a CLP delegate to the Conference.