Replying- to Ken

Scan page 2

reduction policy has been sunk without trace!

blame me! A number of us also voted against the recent ILEA cut Budget. Ine wnole grou voted with the Tories against OVI proposec reinstatement of the cuts exception of Keith Veness, Andy Harris, Steve Bundred and myself.

We're always being told of the threat of the SDP, that if we push too hard, people like Mair Garside wive pushed to them. Mair Garside seems to have a monopoly on abstention! What advice would you give to those comrades on the Guts. the trade 'In Lambeth, Labour... would have had a comfortable majority... had it not been for the defeat of five Labour candidates in the traditional Labour area of Vauxhall, where supporters of Socialist Organiser circulated election material condemning Ted Knight and the policies of the Labour council" - Ken Livingstone, Labour Heraid.

Cheung Siu Ming, SO supporter and a Labour candidate in Princes ward, Vauxhall, replies:

I would like to draw the following points to the attention of Labour Herald readers.

1) The Alliance first won two seats 'in the traditional Labour area of Vauxhall" in the Bishop's ward by-election in 1981. There was a borough-wide protest against Lambeth Council's £50 supplementary rate levy.

There were no Socialist Organiser supporters Bishop's ward. It was continued high rate rises which eroded Labour's support.

2) Socialist Organiser issued no election literature in Vauxhall. Official election literature from Vauxhall Labour Party wards put the case against rent and rate rises and against cuts, arguing for a fight against the Tory government.

This is Vauxhall GMC policy. Socialist Organiser agrees with this policy.

The "confusion" in fact has been sown by Ken Livingstone who appears to want to criticise Vauxhall CLP election material by witch-hunting SO/supporters.

3) Neil Turner, one of the defeated Vauxhall candidates, successfully reversed the proposed cuts at Kennington Old People's Day Centre and Lunch Club; he had to fight to get the rest of the Labour Group to think aned Vic item was headlined tory for Pensioners" in "Herald', CLP newsletter (April/May, Princes edition).

Is this what Ken means by "condemning Ted Knight and the policies of the Labour Council'"? I not, what else is he talking about?

4) The article's strong implication is that Labour would have held the Vauxhall seats if the Labour candidates had not been Socialist Organiser supporters or supporters of the "no cuts, no rent and rate rise" policy. This is nonsense. In fact, SO supporters standing as Labour candidates in Camden and other parts of London have not lost any Labourheld seats.

In Lambeth, candidates with a clear record in support of the "no cuts, no rent and rate rise" policy won in Angell Ward, while others not in agreement with such a policy lost 5 Labour-held seats in Gipsy Hill and Clapham Park.

Last year, with a Londonwide swing to Labour the Tories held on to the GLC seat at Norwood . with a comfortable majority.

5) It is clear that the SDP concentrated their forces around Princes and Bishops wards in Vauxhall in support of John Medway and Roger Liddle in the prominent figures SDP's national organisation. The Labour Party in Vauxhall narrowly failed to defeat this attack, handicapped crucially by Lambeth Council's disastrous policy of high rate rises and cuts.

If Ken had not bothered to read election literature before making serious allegations, then he should apologise to Vauxhali CUP.

If he has read the literature, then his comments are utterly deplorable and belong to the worst sectarian traditions of newspapers such as the News-