Labour Party Conferences both adopted resolutions that Militant should be expelled and an elected Militant supporter was thrown off the South Wales E.C Right-wing CLPs are grasping with glee the policy that Militant should not be sold at Party meetings to expel those who do, and even for selling it in shopping centres.
Such expulsions stand because the NEC sub-committee is dominated by witch-hunters who are only too keen to rubber stamp the expulsion of those they see as trouble-makers. In other cases attempts are being made to expel or "discipline" for a wide variety of reasons, but all of which have in common that those to be expelled have upset the vested Interests of those who would not recognise a principle if it hit them in the well-fed gut.
In Sheffield Attercliffe CLP 5 Milltant supporters have been suspended. One of them, Geoff Bright, is an elected member of the NUR delegation to '85 Party Conference. A whole branch in Bethnal Green & Stepney was suspended for publicly criticising their MP, Peter Shore, and Kinnock for their lack of support for the miners. The Youth Trade Union
Those without the selective
amnesia of the new realists should
recall that under the last Labour
government inequality in society ac-
tually widened, and Thatcher's
governments have not been the first
to attempt to control wages, cut jobs
and attack local government spen-
ding. Rash talk about "the per-
sistance of inequality in Britain rests
on fundamental differences in power
and status at work and in society"
may sound radical, but when the proposed answer is co-operation and
participation" then its emptiness is
exposed. What capitalist is going to
allow participation in decision-
making unless it asists in suppressing
and exploiting the workforce, which The Witch-hunt goes on Rights Campaign (YTURC) was thrown out of Labour Party HO for having organised a successful one-day strike of school students against the prospect of a life on the dole. Peoole have been disciplined for supporting the miners in various ways and challenging those who refused to do so. A Socialist Viewpoint supporter in Brent South CLP, Brian Prince. was threatened with expulsion because he exposed the fact that hs branch Chairperson was collaborating with the victimisation of teachers for trade union activity. Exampies abound, many of them not coming to the attention of the organised left
The right feel strong enough to carry out such actions because of the lack of organised opposition to Kin nock. Kinnock himself is happy to see it happen as part of intimidating and isolating those who reject his programme. Compare this witch-hunt to the way Robert Maxwell is fêted regardless of his persistent use of anti-union laws and sacking of his workforce. Conference Agenda even has an advert for his newspapers!
The campaign against this witchhunt has to be rebuilt as part of the challenge to the general rightward drift. Some on the left are becoming reluctant to defend Militant because they line up with the right against Black Sections, women's and lesbian and gay rights, troops out of Northern Ireland, etc. However, much as we disagree with (and often find obnoxjous) their politics, we have to defend their right to be members of the Party, not least because the right certainly do not differentiate between what hey see as the left and do not stop at attacking Militant. The whole of the left is under attack, and the whole of the lett must be detended. Socialist Viewpoint, No. 7, September 2985, Poge 8
is precisely what previous Labour
governments have attempted to do.
But if tinkering with capitalism in a
minor way is Kinnock's programme,
many of those who would go much further are backing him. The wish to see the back of Thatcher and the return of a Labour government has seduced many into accepting the need for "Unity behind Kinnock"
Yet that can only mean "Unity on Kinnock's terms" since every attempt to oppose his ditching of policies is met by the accusation of splitters and wreckers even when - as with his response to the TUC - it is clearly Kinnock *wrecking», Who is doing the
We, as much as anybody, want to see the return of a Labour government, but we don't accept that this means burying all differences. The unity we will accept is the unity in struggle against the Tories and bosses, not the unity of the graveyard. Every time the left keeps quiet in the interests of "not rocking the boat" the right gain ground. They have never accepted unity with the left: they merely want the left to lie down in order that they and socialist policies can be walked on.
The defeat of the miners, the failure of ratecapping, and the ballot result against industrial action by NUR guards all increase the credibility of the new realists amongst large sections of the working class. The fact that these were largely due to the lack of programme and willingness to fight of these leaders does not detract from this. Whilst sections of those involved in these struggles recognise where the blame lies,
demoralised and cynical. The line that all we can do now is make general propaganda about how nasty the Tories are and wait for a Labour government gains greater credence with every defeat.
Yet the acceptance of this by the left not only allows living standards to be driven down and unemployment up by the Tories now with little opposition, it makes the likely austerity programme of a Kinnock government from the start, not after some years like Miterrand in France) even more likely.
In fact if Labour poses no programme adequate to the crisis it becomes less likely that a Labour government will be elected. Why vote for a Labour Party trying to usurp the mantle of the middle road when there is a made-to-measure Alliance to hand? A hung parliament becomes more likely.
Kinnock may vow that he is against a coalition government but all the indications are otherwise. Naturally, he would prefer to be "king of the castle" without the encumbrance of another party (provided that his internal opposition, the left, have been defeated). But Kinnock's practice shows that he is quite happy to collaborate with Liberals and Tory Wets. Not only is this the focus of his attention in parliament, but he gave clear
Appeals Discussion on Lesbian and Gay Rights Lesbians and gay men suffer systematic discrimination in society at large and also within the labour movement.
One aspect of this discrimiation is highlighted by the fact that annual Party Conference has never discussed the issue. another is the fact that the Party has a policy which is discriminatory (i.e. different ages of consent for heterosexuals and gay men). This cannot go on any longer if we are to show to lesbians and gay men that the Party has anything to offer them.
We urge support for the Labour Campaign for Lesbian and Gay Rights campaign to have the issue debated at this year's annual conference. Positive Action and Black People It is time that our Party listened to the legitimate demands of women and Black people within the Party. Specifically the Party should allow Black people within the Party who so wish to establish Black Sections, as already exists with women's and youth sections. We also urge support for the demands endorsed by the last three year's women's conterences: that national women's conference elect the women's section of the NEC and the national women's committee, that national women's conference has the right to send five resolutions to Party Conference, that there be a rules conference for Labour women, and that there be at least one woman on every shortlist for reselection. We also welcome the further steps made by those constituencies which have had allBlack or all-women shortlists when selecting their parliamentary candidates. We believe that these points represent important steps towards positive action and autonomy for oppressed groups in society and in the Party. Supported by: Campaign Group of MPs Campaign for Labour Party Democracy Target Labour Government Labour Party Black Sections Labour Committee on Ireland Labour Campaign for Lesbian and Gay Rights Labour Brieting Socialist Action Socialist Viewpoint Socialist Organiser
(0) indication after the Couniy Council elections that he preferred Labour Groups to make pacts rather than go into opposition. Almost anything better than class struggle: féting the aristocrats of the Lords in an attempt to defeat abolition of the Metropolitan Councils and the GLC was immensely preferable to organising class action (something shared many of the Left realised). one, Kinnock and the majority of the PLP will rush to form at least a pact, il not a coalition with part or all of the Alliance, only as lifting them into government, but taking the programme totally out of the control of that "nuisance" Party conference. The extremely weak opposition in the Party to the Lib-Lab Pact of 1978/9 is not a good prece lent, but the left should use the ex ample not only to show where such a road leads (to the "Winter of Discontent" and Thatcher's victory) but also to organise noW possibility.
With Kinnock strengthen his position in the Party he has found himself in the position of the pied piper with a scurrying of feet behind him. The "regroupment of the left", better described as the "Great Moving Right Show", has drawn support from many seeking positions in the real one
The ordinating Committee, ingstone, Tom Meacher, and many others now see out for realisation of his
LABOUR PARTY 1984 CONFERENCE Ken Livingstone with Kinnock earlier than If the next parliament is a hung which would be seen not less credible. the against to attempting safe his "kitchen" cabinet or, preferably, once-left Labour Co- Ken Liv- Sawyer, Michael their main chance. Rather than stick any principle against the rightward-moving stream they have plunged in head first. Kinnock couldn't have wished for a greater shield" "dented speech than Livingstone's sell-out of the ratecapping struggle at the GLC. The talk from all these erstwhile Socialist Viewpoint, No. 7, September 1985. Page 9
lefts of forming bridges with Kinnock to keep him out of the hands of the right is demonstrable nonsense. Not only does it ignore the fact that on most issues there is no differnce between Kinnock and the "right" but that Kinnock leads the right, even if he occasionally puts up a "frontman" (like John Evans on reselection 1984 Conference).
It also conveniently ignores the fact that all those who claim this are moving with the right themselves. Tom Sawyer moved the resolution in support of the expulsion of Militant at NUPE Conference and Livingstone, in his platform for Party Treasurer (before his local party mandated him not to stand) described Kinnock and Whitty as "a new partnership that will form an effective leadership".
The claim by sections of these born-again realists still to oppose witch-hunts and support the demands of women, lesbians and gays and black sections become increasingly
Livingstone's witchhunt against John McDonnell for exposing his manoeuvrings at the GLC, and insistance that he had a right to a
parliamentary seat in direct contradiction to his own avowed
policy of preference for women and
black candidates defies any left-over rhetoric. The number of witch-hunts in which the LCC are involved increases rapidly, and anyway. how can you square being an avid supporter of Kinnock, the arch opponent of democratisation and democracy for women, blacks, lesbians and gays and unpopular left wingers?
If the alignment of Livingstone with
the right on fundamental issues was
not clear, then his support for one
member one vote on reselection certainly pins him down. If Kinnock is to
succeed in his programme of class
collaboration then he needs to ensure
that "his" MPs can carry it out without
fear of being brought to account for
their actions. One member one vote
THE HIGHER: HE REACHES.. ..THE
TODAY LOWER HEGETS CLAUSE 4 B
means not only that trade unionists
paying the political levy have no say
in selection, but also that an MP is ac-
countable to one meeting every five
years, with General Committees im-
potent in the meantime: in effect ac-
countable to no one.
The loss of this major democratic
right of reselection (regardless of the
small effect it has had so far) would
be likely to be followed by an attempt
to reverse the election of Leader by
the electoral college, although the
right see no need to attack on this yet,
given the marked reluctance of any
left MP to challenge Kinnock. He has
already spelt out how he sees