Ironically within 24 hours of last Saturday’s Respect NC democracy had been finally snuffed out in the Labour Party without resistance and by an overwhelming majority. For the first time for nearly 100 years Labour Party conference can no longer make policy for the Labour Party. The need for a party like Respect could hardly be more clear.
Fortunately Saturday’s NC represented, in my opinion, a new opportunity for Respect to break out of the impasse it has been in for the last two years and make some real progress. This has not been achieved yet. But the meeting was a step, even if a faltering step, in the right direction. It confirmed my view that the old top-down structure dominated by the SWP is no longer an option. Respect will either change or it will go into repeated and ultimately terminal crisis. That was my conclusion from the meeting.
The catalyst for change has been George Galloway’s letter to the National Council circulated a month or so ago. It was the main item discussed last Saturday and produced the biggest debate the National Council has ever had, and its fullest attendance. The meeting ran out of time and is being reconvened this coming Saturday Sept 29 to complete the agenda.
George Galloway’s letter pointed to a number of uncomfortable truths which some of us have been raising for some time: that the poor result in Southall was a wake-up call; that Respect has not fulfilled its potential either in terms of votes or membership; that in whole areas of the country Respect is effectively moribund; that there are problems of office administration and procedures and that relationships had broken down amongst key figures in Respect.
The resolution George Galloway put to the meeting on Saturday was a series of action points in the framework of his letter designed to address this situation. These include: a serious approach to developments on the left such as the debate in the RMT, the end of the slate system of election at conference, a major membership drive, a better organised and more inclusive executive committee, improved communication and accountability, overhaul of office organisation and the creation of the position of national organiser alongside the national secretary.
John Rees and Michael Lavalette moved several amendments to this. The contentious one being on the issue of the national organiser. This was to the effect that the national organiser would not work alongside the national secretary but would work under the direction of the elected officers i.e. the national secretary. This caused a heated debate but in the end George Galloway’s resolution was adopted unanimously with an “in principle”decision to have a new national organiser with a sub committee to discuss the practical implications and report back.
In my view George Galloway’s proposals are a good start but the process of changes must go a lot further. John Lister and I have a series of proposals on this in the form of a resolution for the Respect conference which are to be discussed on Saturday which would if adopted reshape Respect. Yet even this would not be enough unless Respect successfully turns itself outwards towards new forces like the CPB and the RMT who have in various ways started to discuss the acute crisis of working class representation which now exists. This was the main point I tried to make as strongly as possible in the meeting.
At the present time however the ball is in the court of the SWP. They must have the political will to carry through genuine change otherwise there will be no viable way forward. The bottom line is that the SWP must loosen their grip and put Respect in a position to engage seriously with those on the left and in the unions who are grappling with yet another new stage in the crisis of labour representation.
Technorati Tags: Respect, Political Organisations, Socialism, Socialist, British politics





Leave a comment