Why Block Vote Should Be Opposed

Scan page 12

TAN: TH JOBS FOR ALL My overwhelming feeling people (both male MAY I thank Vladimir Derer for responding to my contribution on the block vote which Socialist Organiser printed on August 11 As the debate over Labour Party democracy gets more intensive it is a pity that no serious discussion on the block vote has taken place among those on the Party's left.

This is ironic, as it is the unions block vote which could seriously retard Tony Benn's election chances and consequently the aspirations of the ieft.

Marxist members of the Labour Party must take some of the blame for faiiing to initiate a debate on the block vote and the structure of the annual conference. Indeed I understand that the Campaign for Labour Party Democracy, of which Vladimir Derer secretary, defeated a resolution at its annual meeting which called for a restructuring of Labour's conference.

Other than last week's contribution by comrade Derer, the only other article on the block vote that l've read by a CLPD member was by Rachel Lever. Writing in Workers Action No. 182, she states, "Mostly what's wrong with the block vote is that the unions delegations are often dominated by non-elected officials...

Whilst this is true, such a position completely misses the crux of the matter, which is the nature of the block vote not the way in which it is cast.

Let me illustrate block vote must be replaced by summarizing the reasons why I oppose it.

Firstly the block vote makes the Labour Party the virtual property of the unions, instead of it being the Party of all sections of the working class such as the unemployed, pensioners, blacks, youth, tenants, etc.

Responsibility

Secondly, the sheer weight of the block vote not only produces the unjustifiable position where a single union can out-vote all the constituencies put together, but it means that the unions can get what they want without the responsibility of taking part in the day to day activities of the Labour Consequently, it is harder to encourage trade unionists to be active in the Party whilst the block vote exists.

The block vote reinforces the historic separation between the industrial and political wings of the movement.

We should see the question • of democracy as a means to winning the Party to new policies which will turn it outwards to the struggles of the working class.

Comrade Derer implies that by placing the question of democracy in this context 1 am relegating the issue to a minor role. In fact he says that what I advocate is "ineffective", "propagandist" and "empty radical rhetoric"

How he arrives at this s00. 1: conclusion baffles me. We will have to agree to differ.

Vladimir Derer accuses me of being in league with the Tribunites, Labour Coordinating Committee and the Clause 4 groups who believe that the "democratic battle has been won. It would appear that comrade Derer overlooked my statement that the Wembly conference decision "must be seen as part of a process of moving tOwards the supremacy of the annual conference. Having conference decide who is to be leader and what the manifesto will be, must mean abolishing the block vote."

This statement makes it clear that I do not believe that the democracy debate has been won. There is much work to be done. One thing is certain, merely calling for a defence of /the electoral college will not inspire those activists who are seeking a fundamental re-appraisal of what the unions' relationship to the Party should be.

On the question of the relationship between the unions and the Labour Party it is worth taking the opportunity to comment on an attempt to rewrite history by comrade Derer.

He states, "far from initiating policies of wage Block vote encourages passivity restraint, for example, trade unions had to be persuaded by Labour's parliamentary leadership before (in the mistaken belief that these were part of a socially just policy) they accepted them.

Architect It my memory serves me rightly it was Jack Jones, the then General Secretary of the TGWU who was the principal architect of the Social Contract. The unions didn't need much persuading to reach an agreement on pay as firstly they were politically incapable of seeing any alternative, and Writeback to ist Organiser Middle Lane London N8 secondly they were anxious to defuse the rising tide of militancy in their ranks which had grown under the Heath government.

My article was not meant to be a blueprint for replacing the block vote. It was an attempt to open a debate on the options before us.

I did state that the block vote needs abolishing, but as this seems unlikely at present 1 would at least the Labour Party into interventionist force working class struggles.

Socialist policies will not automatically emerge from the democracy debate: It is essential that the battle for Party democracy is linked to the battle for a socialist programme and does not become a substitute for it.

DEREK CATTELL