'Aggressive tactics would only isolate the left'

Scan page 6

THE MOST important immediate task of CLPD (and of other organisations belonging to the Rank and File Mobilising Committee) is to assess correctly the significance of what happened this year in Brighton.

One possible error arises from the tendency now exhibited by some comrades to judge Brighton almost exclusively in the terms of the narrowness of the result in the Deputy Leadership contest. Such a perspective may be emotionally comforting, but is highly misleading.

The Deputy Leadership campaign was an offshoot of the process of democratisation of the Party which has been going on for years. In the form in which the Deputy Leader campaign occurred, it is likely to remain a once-and-for-all event. It cannot be artificially separated from the context in which it occurred, and its significance and potential effects must be judged accordingly.

Undoubtedly Brighton showed that, for the time being at least, the democratic advance was successfully checked. At all levels of the Party the support for further constitutional changes was seen to be ebbing.

Soft

On the NEC - as a result of the unreliability of the 'soft centre' (Hart, Hoyle, Kinnock, Lestor, Short) -majority support for democratic reforms had disappeared before four of our supporters (Atkinson, Beckett, Dix, Kelly, were knocked off in this year's Among the trade unions halt to. democratic reforms was called already last year when there was an overwhelming support for the reimposition of the three year rule, for constitutional issues. This year's rejection of even a qualified version of the rule means that the majority among the unions had no second thoughts on this subject.

Converts The defeat on the Manifesto the second year running - by a slightly wider margin this time - means that there were no new converts.

Of course, the fact that the retiring - and allegedly wildly Left-wing - NEC had recommended opposition to the Manifesto reform (thanks to Hart, Kinnock, Lestor and Short, with Hart, who chaired the meeting, using both her votes), did not help. The easy defeat of the reference-back move on the 'shortlist of one' illustrates that concern about the circumventing of the constitutional requirement of mandatory re-selection is not widespread, particularly when we bear in mind that, quite unprecedentedly, this year's three other reference-back motions were carried.

No doubt support for democratic reforms is still strongest among the constituencies. However, even here it has been falling off.

For the last two years. CLPD model resolutions have received only modest support. CLPD's chosen subjects had increasingly to wait until the amendments stage to qualify for inclusion on the Agenda.

(Normally a minimum CLPD Bulletin.

support of seven Chis or other affiliated organisations is required to achieve inclusion).

CLPs opted for 'issues' in preference to constitutional subjects. This, despite the fact that the wide support for mandatory re-selection seemed to indicate the acceptance of the argument that. without increased accountability (and hence further constitutional reforms), the policies of the PLP and future Labour governments will not be significantly affected, no matter how many conference resolutions. on 'issues' are passed.

Pull out But the weakening of the struggle for greater accountability is by no means limited to the NEC, the unions and the CLPs. Organisations which aspire to the role of 'opinion leaders" , e.g. LCC, NOLS and 'Clause Four' , have chosen to pull out of the Rank and File Mobilising Committee at the very moment when even the limited democrati gains of the last few years are under threat: when prominent Party leaders and trade unionists are now openly discussing the possibility of doing away with annual elections and recorded voting in the electoral college: when proposals for increasing the MPs' share in that college are already on the Agenda for next year's Conference: and when the Party's relatively liberal internal regime is being threatened by the suggested reintroduction of the list of proscribed organisations. or at the very least. by some form of inquisition.

fit is clear thai inme Did Healey's victory halt dem alleged defenders of parliamentary democracy and representative government are dead set to start a new membership drive by expelling people from the It is true, of course, that Tony Benn came near to winning the Deputy Leadership contest. His campaign was widely publicised in the media. It aroused considerable interest in the wide Labour movement, and, above all, among trade unions, and had an enthusiastic following among the committed.

All this manifested itself in well-aitended meetings, especially during trade union conferr-nces At the same time it must be faced that the narrowness of the result was partly due to factors related more I! the way in which various atic advance? union delegations reached their final decision as to whom to support, rather than to the wishes of the membership.

What is significant is that wherever wider membership was consulted, the majority seemed to support Dennis Healey (NUM here seems to have been one exception).

This by itself does not invalidate the narrowness of the result, as the political choices of the unions and affiliated organisations (CLPs) are seldom, if ever, based on decisions taken at branch level, let alone the result of a one person one vote election.

Nevertheless, the margin, sometimes a very wide margin, by which union members expressed their preterence for Healey does indicate that the argument cratie reforms, and the hesitations among the trade union delegations to support reforms already on the Agenda (e.g. Manifesto), as well as Tony Benn's candidature, clearly indicate a change of mood.

Concern over Labour's chances to win the next general election, which are threatened by the present divisions, has made the need for Party unity an urgent pronty: even at the cost of entering into a compromise with that wing of the Party which is led by the majority of MPs and trade union leaders.

There can be little doubt that the 'presidential' style in which the Deputy Leadership campaign was fought, and the fear of even greater divisions, has contributed to the willingness to compromise.

To adopt aggressive tactics at this stage, to set up, for example, yet another "Left-wing' group which would organise meetings all over the country with speakers denouncing the present parliamentary leadership, would only result in further isolation of the 'Left' and be an even greater threat to democratic reforms already achieved.

Spectrum

The democratic reforms were gained because they were supported by a very wide spectrum of opinion within the Party. They cannot be successfully defended without that support. But this support will be lost if those who carried the brunt of the struggle - or are credited with having carried it - come to be seen by the majority of Party members as a divisive force. That he connois drunk now presented those who won the main battles 1981 Conference The however, can only be suce essfully defended in the This mean, primarily| that it is those who are setting out to destroy them who as the ones far as concerned, it is are patiently the need Reforms that coming u next year must be argued for as essential for the sake ol Party unity.

manoeuvre Just a Democratic reform necessary preconditior more unifying Party structure, on which will away with the present div isions. But at this stage w ieved.

which will ale the LabParty widen appeal by practice 59 positive mina tion favour of subjected to special of op pression such women and ethnic minorities, or by increasing the voting strength of CLPs at Conference in order to increase their potential membership.

Last but not least, it is necessary to mobilise support for the commitment by che Pay extension 7 Party leaders lO 0 E public ownership. Without such a commitment the alternative economic strategy amounts to little more than an alternative way of running a capitalist economy.

Scan page 7

Sucialist Organiser, Thursday 15 Ortober 1981 Page