Build workplace branches!

Scan page 11

Subscribe!

Workplace branches can help turn passive working class support for the Labour Party active participation AN important but littlenoticed decision of this year's Labour Party conference was to approve model rules for Labour Party workplace branches.

These branches can be established with a minimum of ten members in any workplace. The definition of 'workplace' is left open: but the rules seem to permit separate branches to be established in different sections of a large factory or office complex, or different schools within a borough.

The rules add:

"In any dispute over the precise definition of area to be covered the National Executive Committee will have the final decision."

"20% of the membership or eight members, whichever is the larger shall be present for a meeting to be quorate."

The status of the workplace branch, roughly speaking, is similar to that of a Young Socialists branch or women's section, rather than a ward branch.

Membership applications have to be processed through wards, rather than directly through the workplace branch. (Normally, however, this should be only a formality: the workplace branch officers can collect application forms and send them on to the relevant ward).

Likewise, workplace branch members pay their Labour Party membership dues through the relevant ward branch. The workplace branch does not get a cut out of these dues.

"The funds of the workplace branch shall consist of donations, collections and receipts from activities undertaken by the workplace branch, and other means as might be agreed locally and approved by the National Executive Committee."

The system for delegates Constituency Labour Parties is as follows:

"The Branch shall be entitled to one delegate to any Constituency Labour Party provided it has a mimimum of ten individual members of that Constituency Labour Party within the Branch. A Branch with fewer than ten members from any one constituency shall be entitled to one delegate to the Constituency Labour Party with the. largest membership in the Branch. The delegation is a nominal one for the Branch and is not proportional to membership."

Aims are defined like this:

«The objectives are:

1) to provide a firm base for recruitment to the Party and to encourage participation;

ii) to extend the influence of the Party to the widest audience and generate more interest in political matters amongst trade unionists;

ili) to provide opportunities for political education and propaganda for the Tv) to propagate the principles ana policies oi the v) to reflect the strong links between the Party and the trade unions at national, regional and local levels in the co-ordination of campaigns and activities;

vi) to work with the Constituency Parties covered by the membership of the Branch.' 'The business of the Workplace branch shall preclude any industrial matters that are properly the responsibility of the appropriate trade union organisation.

Obviously this restrictive point - like the corresponding clauses in trade union rules forbidding "political' discussion in union meetings - leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Narrowly interpreted, it could stymie any attempt by workplace branches to relate to day-to-day issues in the workplace. Active workplace branches are. likely to press for a liberal interpretation.

Another necessity for lively workplace branches is that they should be able to meet at the workplace, during dinner breaks or at worst straight after work, and thus involve people unwilling or unable to attend evening meetings. This will be especially important for women workers burdened with childcare responsibilities.

A possible problem is created by point 9 of the model rules:

«The meeting place should not be such as to preclude an official of the Party attending.

Labour Party workplace branches, in liaison with the trade unions, will have to win guarantees from management that canteen, social club, common room (etc) facilities can be used for meetings and that access will be given to outside Labour Party officials.

Mate.

The last Socialist Organiser delegate meeting, on Sunday October 17, discussed these rules and the possible problems. We felt that workplace branches offer an important opening to draw more workers into the political fight within the Labour Party, and urged all SO groups to look towards setting up such branches.

We should encourage workplace branches to be as active as possible, for example producing workplace bulletins and inviting speakers from groups like CND, Labour Committee on Ireland, Women's Fightback, Anti-Apartheid, black community groups, Labour Campaign for Gay Rights or Gay Rights at Work, etc., to discuss joint campaigning work. And we should push for workplace branches to request reports from local Labour MPs and councillors.

It is important to move quickly - first in order to bring the weight of workplace branches into the fight against the witch-hunt, and, second, to make sure that it is the f Left that takes the initiative in setting up these branches and determining how open and active they. are.

Rates: £5 for three months, £8:75 for six months, and £16 for a year.

Bundle of five each week: £12 for three months.

Bundle of 10: £21 for three months.

Name.

Address I endose £ To: Socialist Organisor, co mudare Lane, - 20 :1 London N8 8PL. FRANK Field - a member of the Tribune group, but a leading witch-hunter -has proposed that the Labour Party : Young Socialists be shut down.

In a letter to the new NEC, be couples suggestions about which Militant supporters should be purged with a demand for the 'temporary suspension' of the LPYS, 'now totally a Militant organisation.' A shower of resolutions from CLPs to the NEC ia needed to forestall this proposal.

25p plus 15½p postage from SO, 28 Middle Lane, London N8.

Next Socialist Organiser delegate meeting: Saturday December 4, 11am to 5pm, in Sheffield.

Scan page 12

teback SWP view of Iran Albert Spanswick - leader of the opposition to all-out strike Dear S.0, I WAS pleased to see Chris Beer's piece on gay rights, but it worried me a bit to see the Bill outlawing the Paedophile Information Exchange dismissed as a simple attack on the rights of young people to determine their October 28, 1982 Page We invite readers to send us their letters, up to a usual maximum length of 400 words. Send to Socialist Organiser, c/o 28. Middle Lane. London N8. and censorship. This is not an accurate picture of what feminists really want. But what are we to do when the Left continually equates sexual freedom with the freedom of men to oppress women? WHILE on holiday in the USA last month I went to a public meeting in Boston organised by the Socialist Workers Party (sister organisation of the British International Marxist Group) about the Iranian revolution.

The SWP claims to be Trotskyist, but there was little that they said in the meeting that would indicate that. The speaker, an Iranian member of the SWP, spoke Shah and brought Khomeini to power. He recognised that the present Iranian government was capitalist, but felt it should be defended against the "great Satan" , US-led imperialism.

He thought it "unfortunate" that the conditions of the anti-imperialist struggle forced the government to ---00-suppress the working class, to cease land reform in favour of the poor peasants and to deny rights to women and to the Kurds and other national minorities in Iran.

He pointed to the Shoras (the now largely sham "workers' councils") as evidence of the health of the revolution, and argued for support for the present Iranian invasion of Tran on the In hATT TA grounds that it was defending the Iranian revolution against imperialism.

A supporter of the but which is still influenced by Stalinist ideas, was given time to speak from the floor. He pointed out some of the obvious flaws in the speaker's arguments from the point of view of Marxism.

External

The speaker saw imperialism in essentially the same way that Khomeini does, as a force external to Iran bent on crushing the Iranian revolution, rather than as an international system which includes Iran with its capitalist government.

Fighting imperialism means fighting now for rights for the working class, the poor peasants, women and the national minorities rather than putting these off in favour of fighting the "anti-imperialist" struggle in alliance with the Islamic government.

The Fedayeen minority supporter also argued that Khomeini's anti-imperialism was largely sham - populist anti-US measures coupled also described the nature of the Shoras and the way the Mullahs exercised control over them.

The SWP's positions on Iran seem to be a return to Stalin's theory i of "two camps" where the world is divided between "them" and "us" (the boundaries of both groups nevery being accurately defined) and any capitalist government carrying out actions broadly "anti-imperialist" or "progressive" becomes one of "us"

Unfortunately this theory often leads, as in Iran, to putting off the struggle for social reform under such a "progressive" government. What does the working class in Iran gain from speeches by Khomeini denouncing US imperialism? Materially, very little.

I raised these criticisms with an SWP member after the meeting. I was told that I didn't understand the great class polarisation going on in Iran. I asked which side of the polarisation Khomeini was on, but got no reply. The SWPer suggested I read Castro to learn about anti-imperialism.

With teachers like that,

----- pull-quotes -----

ANDS OFF THE YS!

Im a "UNREGISTERED

of the anti-imperialist revo- lution that had toppled the

Fedayeen minority, a group which claims to be Marxist,