Alan Thornett reports on a meeting organised by Medway Trades Council at which he was one of the speakers.

I spoke on behalf of Respect at an interesting and well-attended and well organised meeting of the Medway Trades Council in Rochester on Tuesday night, which was around the theme of the crisis of working class representation. The other speakers were John Rees from the Left List, Hannah Sell from the CNWP, and Gary Heather from the Labour Representation Committee and the CWU union Executive Committee.

Amongst the trade union delegates present there were supporters of various political organisations. There were several supporters of the SWP, several supporters of the Socialist Party and at least one member of the CPB. There were also several LP members who were critical of New Labour and a prospective LP local candidate who put the mainstream (Brownite) point of view.
It was a very good discussion. John Rees spoke first, making a generally supportable contribution on the general political situation, the economic crisis, and the political character of new Labour. He rightly extended solidarity to those battling away to win the Labour Party back for the left but regarded it to be a mistaken aspiration.
Gary Feather said that while he was not there to defend New Labour, reclaiming Labour for the left was a viable proposition, particularly given the continued link with the unions – which was the most important factor as far he was concerned.

I said that the problem with the link was that the form that it had taken under New Labour was a part of the problem. New Labour had given absolutely nothing to the trade unions, more-or-less as a point of principle, yet the unions continued to bank-roll New Labour to the tune of about 90% of its income. This was an issue which had emerged in various ways in this years round of trade union conferences.
Hannah Sell put the CNWP position on all this – that New Labour is now a straightforward party of big business and therefore we need a new mass party of the working class. What she didn’t explain, however, is exactly how this is advanced by an endless propaganda campaign for such a party which does not result in any concrete steps to bring it to fruition. She argued that, depending on how you count it, it took the Labour Party 40 years to come into being – though she was not advocating that the CNWP should go on for that long before it makes a move.

Most speakers from the floor wanted a new party of some kind – though there were different views of the form it should take. In the course of this the Labour Party perspective candidate made a robust, though rather disingenuous, defence of new Labour, saying that it had done some good things such as the minimum wage and maternity rights. Myself, John Rees and others argued that unless that was set against their appalling wider record it made no sense. Numerous vivid accounts of the true record of the betrayals of new Labour were recounted to the meeting.

Another strand in the debate was electoral politics. I argued that while we should not seek to build electoralist parties, participation in the electoral field was essential if such parties were to win wide appeal. Several floor speakers argued that there are plenty of other things people could do and that maybe we should de-prioritise elections.

John Rees did not support that point of view but his emphasis on fighting elections was far less than many of his speeches in the past. In fact he did not put forward any kind of project for electoral work – which was a bit of a gap in his contribution. There was no mention of Respect, or the Left List, or even Left Alternative.

I argued that while Respect was a modest initiative its strength was that it was the only left party to break into Westminster since the 1940s and it was the only left party which is a genuine contender in several constituencies for Westminster seats in the next general election. However, Respect does not see itself as the answer to the crisis of working class representation but hopefully, along with others, a part of the answer.

11 responses to “Medway Trades Council discusses working class representation”

  1. This seems like an initiative worthy of repeating elsewhere.
    What’s remarkable, after all the backbiting on the internet, vituperative meetings, councillors swapping hats etc, is that this debate took place at all.
    What’s noteable is that it was instigated by the Trades Council.
    So, I conclude that where the unions are prepared to use their representative organisations to pull together the factions claiming to represent it, it’s possible to bring a measure of order.

    The statistic that the unions provide 90% of Labour funding is the most telling one.
    New Labour is certainly on the rocks. It’s vote is in freefall at almost every local election.
    Brown’s leadership is openly under discussion in almost every media outlet.

    But New Labour’s unpopularity is not down to Brown’s personal characteristics.
    It’s a result of their stubborn attachment to the failed policies of the past.
    These may have worked when the economy was booming, but not now.
    Before the next General Election in 2 years time, the picture will be very different.
    As is becoming increasingly clear, the makings of a systemic crisis are already coming together.

    The effects of the Credit Crunch are still unwinding in Britain.
    Currently, due to the heavy exposure of Bradford and Bingley to buy to let investment.
    This was underwritten by the other major banks.
    But the valuations on which these investments were made are now declining every day.
    If one or more of these banks goes bust, it has the potential to bankrupt the exchequer.
    That raises the possibility of big cuts in public spending and lay offs in the public sector.
    Furthemore, the idea that the crisis can be confined to the financial sector while the manufacturing sector remains firewalled is illusory.
    There’s already growing evidence of a worldwide and simultaneous collapse in order books.

    Simply expecting the unions to jump ship and support minority initiatives at this point is not only unrealistic, but lets the right wing in the Labour Party off the hook.
    If the unions don’t develop their own programmatic response to the impending economic turmoil, the soft alternatives to Brown will step forward to fill the breach.
    That means that socialists need to be holding more of these union sponsored meetings, with a view to exerting union pressure for a major challenge in the Labour Party.
    A united front of Trade Unionists, Socialists and Labour Party members to stop the train wreck of the Labour Party, the historic creation of the British working class, by the interlopers operating as New Labour.

    Like

  2. Leading members of the SP/CWI, Respect Renewal and the SWP speak on the same platform and it only gets one comment?

    I genuinely surprised at the lack of response to this.

    Like

  3. Darren wrote

    “I (was) genuinely surprised at the lack of response to this”

    Perhaps because it’s right and that’s not what

    sectarians do?

    Like

  4. Excellent choice Prianikoff. I can’t get enought of Geroge’s voice and it links to some other good stuff. Thanks!

    Like

  5. With a lot of people, I’d rate the Possum as the greatest living male singer in popular music.
    Someone who retains a close link to his roots in the hillbilly music of Hank Williams, but is totally distinctive.
    Amazing that he’s still touring at 77. He’s over in Ireland in August.

    Like

  6. “So, I conclude that where the unions are prepared to use their representative organisations to pull together the factions claiming to represent it, it’s possible to bring a measure of order”

    Can I just say that I think thats 100 per cent correct?

    Like

  7. it is interesting that none of us can get away with talking the kind of rot we engage in on blogs in front of a trade union audience. i always thought galloway had something of a point when he cited the narrowness of respects base as one factor powering the split (its actually something I think both sides, at some level, agree on) and one reason for this, is that this kind of wider audience simply would not tolerate the descent into point-scoring, the listing of ‘crimes’, and general personalised invective which became the order of the day at a certain point in the split.

    The absence of self discipline involved in this is one reason why the work of trying to repair the damage is so hard. Rather then simply being accountable to each other it helps very much if your forced to be accountable to layers of activists who can take or leave you: trade unions provide one mechanism for this. Other arena’s can sometimes have an analogous function but it does seem as if, at a certain point, the larger movement which had borne us all along ceased to have this disciplining effect. We have to get over imagining that others find our disputes as interesting as we do. One suspects not.

    Like

  8. johng – “this kind of wider audience simply would not tolerate the descent into point-scoring, the listing of ‘crimes’, and general personalised invective which became the order of the day at a certain point in the split.”

    Hmmm….I think trade unionists can also descend into fratricidal warfare. Raiding is, for instance, a big problem here in North America. The CAW was, for a long while, been in a war with SEIU in Ontario where CAW was raiding healthcare locals. The CAW is now out of the regional labour body, the Ontario Fed. of Labour as a result of it. The stuff with SEIU down in the USA that included the attack on the Labor Notes conference. And, of course, the often violent inter and intra union warfare of the McCarthy years. Or then there’s France with the constant battle for members between the union centrals because of the particularities of French workplaces, with workplace councils, etc.
    It’s not simply the social composition – it has to do with whether the movement is pushing forward and outward or retreating inward, plus a whole series of other factors that have to be looked at in their particularity.

    Like

  9. The Neil Young review brought a lot of traffic to the site last week and my guess is that the music fans who come here must wonder what bizarre world they are entering. I know I sometimes do.

    However most people do not follow politics most of the time and we have to accept that it’s a larger part of our lives than for the majority of the population. It’s unavoidable and largely positive that political activists try to keep themselves informed and to engage in debates where possible. I strongly agree with Johng’s remarks about personal invective and point scoring. That’s why I discourage the latter and delete or ban the former but the blogs have allowed a lot of discussion that would not otherwise have happened.

    The Public Sociologist has a piece that’s worth reading on the subject.

    http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot.com/2008/07/left-blogs-and-left-blogging.html

    Like

  10. One of the dangers with blogging IMO is a kind of magical thinking. This involves believing that the debates that take place in cyberspace are more symmetrical with the debates outside it then they actually are. Mike Rosen put it well when he suggested they’re like discussions in a pub (and of course informal discussions have always played an important part in education and development inside the socialist movement). However most people don’t confuse ‘putting the world to rights’ in such circumstances with the world itself. I think the difference might be that because of the unknown nature of the audience, we’re all vunerable to delusions of grandeur in this context.

    Like

  11. Dear Sir , I am trying to contact a Brian Kelly a union official in the Medway council area .Early this year I spoke with Brian but have lost his contact details on my computer .It was to do with a court case to do with race discrimination .I would be most gratefull for your help my mobile is 0861548061 .Regards John Wolfe

    Like

Leave a reply to johng Cancel reply

Trending