Showing newest posts with label John McDonnell. Show older posts
Showing newest posts with label John McDonnell. Show older posts

Monday, June 11, 2007

Can the forward march of Labour be restarted?

.

The situation that the left finds itself in after the defeat of the McDonnell bid for the Labour leadership is a complex one. A bit of a debate has broken out about this around a statement issued by Socialist Resistance (SR) This was published on Liam Mac Uaid’s blog :

The key passage is: “McDonnell’s defeat throws the Labour left into serious crisis. No spin can hide it. The project of reclaiming the Labour or the idea that the Labour Party is a fruitful arena for the left to work in have been dealt a devastating blow.

“All this has implication for Respect, which should be taking the initiative to open or re-open a dialogue with those on the left who are currently not in Respect as to how they see the way forward.

“The Morning Star and the CPB are a case in point. They are likley to find it increasingly difficult to cling to a policy of reclaiming Labour. Apparently a new discussion has already opened up on this internally in the CPB. The Morning Star had already called a conference in June on “Politics After Blair” at which the issue will now be unavoidable.

“But Respect needs to be open and flexible in this situation to any new forces from the Morning Star or the trade union left. It should do whatever is necessary to ensure that new forces have space to make their influence felt. If it can do this it could break it out of its current impasse and open up a new stage of development.
“Respect’s task in this process is to turn the tide of politics back towards the left. Rebuild ideological and practical opposition to the market. Work with the left in the unions to build an independent pluralist left alternative alongside the struggle to regenerate the unions and rebuild trade union strength and organisation.”


To which I posted a comment to the effect that SR are making two mistakes: i) in not understanding that Respect is not a vehicle around which left unity can be built; and less explicably ii) that SR seem to completely fail to understand the political perspective of the CP.

I concluded my initial remarks by saying that currently “the building blocks for any serious alternative to Labour are utterly absent, but where the situation isn't hopeless either.”

Given the undemocratic manoeuvrings in and around Respect, the media galavanting of George Galloway, and the dispersal of the layer of left social democrats who had aggregated around the Socialist Alliance in various parts of the country, then I would characterise Respect thus: “Who is Respect? Galloway or the SWP? Anyone else? Will either of those forces play the productive role you are calling on them to play? If there is no actually existing force within Respect who will steer the organisation to play the role you think it could play, then how could it happen?

“Even were the SWP or Galloway to have a damascene conversion, would anyone on the activist left trust them? No-one is going to join Respect, or particularly want to work with them. The whole project is basically an embarrassment now.

“If we are looking for a left unity project, then we have missed the boat. The wave of left activists who left the labour party after Clause IV and over the Iraq war could have been attracted to an organisation that respected labour movement norms of behaviour. But were never going to be attracted to respect.”


SR are utterly self delusioonal if they believe that the CP or any significant left from the unions would touch Respect with a barge. Even were the Political Committee of the CP so minded, and I have no reason to think they are, then the membership would probably not agree to it.

The failure of McDonnell’s campaign has produced unhelpful knee-jerk reactions from Respect and the Socialist Party that the Labour Left should join them in their equally unsuccessful campaigns outside the Labour party. They remind me of the mayor of Amity, swearing that the water is safe. For example Thornett writes: "It¹s right to say to the Labour left, and those like the CPB (and some of the trade union left) who have clung to a Reclaim Labour policy for so long that after the McDonnell collapse the only rational conclusion in the cold light of day is that the Labour left has no useful future in the Labour party. There is no point in saying anything else."

In fact this approach is completely misguided. Instead of looking at whether we can reconstitute the greatly diminished left around already flawed projects, we need to take stock of the current political situation.

The overwhelming features are i) that the right within the Labour Party are utterly triumphant, and their victory is structurally irreversible. ii) The Labour party has failed to make the same shift to the right with its electoral base – the enduring progressive and social democratic attitudes of labour voters was well described recently on the SWP blog, Lenin’s Tomb ; iii) that the far left have failed to break that progressive base away from electoral loyalty to the Labour party; iv) the unions – on the whole - maintain ideological and political opposition to New Labour values, as can be seen by the way the unions make the running in opposing PFI, Academies and private equity. v) the structural problems of the unravelling British state.

So how can we seek to harness the positive aspects of the current situation to strengthen the left?

Alan Thornett has replied to me and asked whether I think Respect’s genuine electoral successes are the “wrong type of voters”. In a sense they are, but not in the sense he implies. Respect has done well particularly with that minority of voters for whom the war is the overriding political issue, but for the majority of the working class that is not the case, and opposition to the war has been subsumed into the general cynicism about politics.

This is where SR’s misunderstanding of the CP’s position is clear, because the CP are talking some sense over this issue:

As Robert Griffiths, the CP General Secretary: recently wrote : “But what is needed now more than ever is for the trade union movement, once again, to take on its historic responsibility to ensure the existence of a mass party of labour. For all the assistance that socialists and communists can render, the unions alone have the human, financial and organisational resources, as well as the class interest, to take the necessary steps.

“Together with the non-sectarian left, they need to work out a political strategy which takes account of current realities. For example, most major unions remain affiliated to the Labour Party and are unlikely to leave it in the near future.
“The first steps in this direction might be for all the major unions to affiliate and participate fully in the Labour Representation Committee. Deals between union leaders in smoke-free rooms to win resolutions at Labour Party conference are not enough. The active involvement of unions and their members in the LRC would be the clearest declaration of political intent.

“The LRC could itself go the extra mile and allow full membership status to socialist organisations including the Communist Party, respecting their right to participate independently in elections in return for an agreement not to campaign for the dismantling of the Labour Party through further union disaffiliations.
“In their relations with the Labour Party, unions should stop all financial, logistical and political support for MPs who consistently vote against key union policies. “


SR are correct to highlight the Morning Star conference as important, not least because the CP still able to punch above their weight, and alongside John McDonnell, we also have Ken Livingstone and Jon Cruddas attending. At the deputy leadership hustings at GMB congress last week Cruddas came out in favour of starting to renationalise public utilities.

The Labour Left were crushingly defeated in the PLP, but the McDonnell campaign has gathered together a nucleus of activists, who are less isolated and more motivated than they were before the campaign. It is as fruitless for us to argue with then that they should leave the party as for them to argue we should join it – comrades need to come to their own conclusions.

The way forward is for all the left, inside and outside the Labour party, to promote the trade unions in exercising their own political voice. By and large, the unions will not abandon their stake in the labour party until they have exhausted its historical usefulness. But currently they are not making enough demands on the party, and so not testing the usefulness of the link.

The Labour Representation Committee could become a vehicle for the unions to exercise collective political voice and if a substantial section of organised labour is to draw the conclusion that a party of labour needs to be refounded, as they effectively did in 1931, then the LRC could be the body around which that debate tales place.

Of course there are serious obstacles, not least of which is the LRC’s requirement for Labour Party membership, which is a serious obstacle to many grassroots trade unions and community activists. But again the way forward is for local trade union bodies to affiliate and open a dialogue about being able to send delegates who are not individual LP members.

In the meantime, we have largely missed the boat in England of building an electoral alternative to New Labour. There may still be a case of standing against Labour, but this can only be done by building grassroots links first, not by building the roof before the walls like Respect and the CNWP have done.

There is serious work that can be done, but the vehicle for that work is not Respect nor the CNWP, the focus remains where it perhaps always should have been, with organised Labour in the mass organisations of our class.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

A crushing defeat.

The next Prime Minister’s campaign manager, Jack Straw has said: "We are delighted that the party is uniting behind Gordon and giving him such overwhelming support."

Overwhelming indeed, with 308 MPs nominating him, and the speaker and deputy speaker of the house probably would have done, parliamentary convention prevented them.

MPs nominating Brown included fairly frequent left rebels like Bob Marshall-Andrews, and centre left rebel Kate Hoey nominated no-one.

Any sensible electoral strategy against Brown would have sought to split the centre away from the hard Brownite/Blairite right. But instead the hard left ran a campaign aimed only at their existing core constituency – an approach that was always unlikely to get sufficient MPs nominations.

In truth of course, there were few other options, as since the death of Robin Cook there was no credible electoral candidate for the centre left. Further evidence of the way the right in the party has structurally and irreversibly underpinned its dominance.

There was some truth in Michael Meacher’s rationale for putting himself forward on the basis that McDonnell could never get sufficient MP nominations, but he was in no better position. Indeed his policy platform was almost indistinguishable from McDonnell’s, and there are other issues that undermine his credibility with some activists.

Could the defeat for the hard left have been any more overwhelming? They have failed to achieve a contest, with a crushing majority of MPs rejecting them, and the right attracting the votes of even the soft left. This is an utter rejection of the Labour Left, even more remarkable after ten years of PFI, privatisation, inadequate pensions, imperial war, growing inequality and a terrible housing crisis.

McDonnell failed to achieve the support of any major union, and on the NEC, when a motion was moved to reduce the required number of nominations only two members voted for it. Even two of the left’s own members on the NEC voted against it. Indeed the apparently high votes of the left for the Grassroots Alliance for the NEC are shown to be illusory, because Anne Black who appears in their list is actually a right wing Brownite!

The Labour left need to seriously consider what their strategy is now. Strangley the last issue of labour Left Briefing before the leadership election was declared had no discussion of what they should do after the McDonnell campaign.

Part of the difficultly is that within the Labour Party the ideological victory of the right is almost total, that there is no alternative to neo-liberalism, privatisation and deregulation. What is more the constitutional changes in the party and reduced powers for local government make it very hard for the left to influence policy or debate or build a base.

The aspects of hope is that the Labour Party may have irrevocably been won for the right, but the political views of its electoral base have not followed and are now to the left of it. And the unions articulate political opposition to PFI, private equity and inequality.

We need to turn the tide of politics and rebuild ideological and practical opposition to the market. It is therefore vital that we work with our strengths and encourage the unions in finding their political voice.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

John McDonnell: Another world is possible

As it looks more and more likely that McDonnell won’t get the nominations to get on the ballot form due to a gutless tightly whipped PLP who won’t think for themselves, and also the high threshold makes it increasingly unobtainable.

A coronation ensues for one Gordon Brown therefore democracy has been bumped off by mass toadying by the PLP.

But hey, as they say, it aint over till it’s over.

Looking at Gordon Brown’s website. His priorities include:

Britain number one for education
An NHS that earns the trust of patients and staff
More affordable housing
Every child the best start in life
Stronger, safer, more cohesive communities
Tackling climate change
Better work-life balance
The challenge of terrorism and security

That makes eight priorities: are there priorities between the priorities. More to the point how is Brown going to achieve these goals and what do they represent? What is meant by “every child having the best start in life”? As poverty increases among working age people Brown will have workfare and lifelong debt waiting for these children. That’s assuming they do not get asbo’ed and sent to prison.

What of the future? Part of the problem is the Left is so fragmented. In the LP, we need a Campaign group that works together much more cohesively and orientates towards the activist base in the unions as well, with a counter whip if necessary. We also need people to emerge from their democratic centralist shells and to push forward struggles in as united a way as possible, whether the struggles are inside either wing of the labour movement or outside in campaigning organisations. We also need a clear ideological account of what the Left is and how to fight neo-liberalism.

Finally John McDonnell has proved himself as a leader of the Left who can open up political room for the Left to put forward its ideas. There is an opportunity still to build on what has been achieved.

Monday, May 14, 2007

John McDonnell will be taking on Brown....

The waiting has finally ended... Step forward John McDonnell. Thankfully Michael Meacher stepped down in favour of John. The media is making comments like, "hardly a household name", "just who is John McDonnell"? Well, unsuprising really but I have to say that I am very pleased John has got this far.

I saw John speak at the hustings at Labour Against the War and he was much more impressive than Michael Meacher. McDonnell at least talked about his vision for uniting the left over his campaign and to bring LP activists together while Meacher rattled off a shopping list of proposals. McDonnell was voted for unanimously. He has also got Tribune and Unison (Scotland) supporting him and by all accounts he did well debating at the Fabian Society last night.
To be honest, it will be hard work to get the nominations but fingers crossed. I will continue to support the campaign and hope comrades will do as well. At least this campaign highlights the Left, left -wing ideas and the bringing together of activists. And debate and discussion back into the public domain.


There was coverage of the Deputy Leadership contest as well on the news with bits on Harriet Harman and Hazel Blears ("she bores me to tears"..). Interestingly, there was a bit on Jon Cruddas and emphasis on his trade union backing..

I am off now to get drunk and to raise a toast to John McDonnell (well, that's my excuse)!

Saturday, May 12, 2007

John McDonnell statement & interviews

.


I publish above a brief clip of John McDonnell speaking to camera about why he is standing. If you double click on it and enter YouTube you can find a number of policy statements by John as well.

In a comment to the Michael Meacher interview below, a John McDonnell supporter challenged my claim that I couldn't find a John McDonnell interview on YouTube. So I am obliged to Owen Jones from John McDonnell’s campaign for sending a link to a longer interview from John. Watch it here

And here is the interview with John McDonnell on Thursday from the BBC: