Socialist electoral unity
The Alliance for Workers’ Liberty met with representatives of the Socialist Party, the Alliance for Green Socialism, and the Socialist Alliance (Provisional) for a Socialist Green Unity Coalition committee meeting on 2 October.
We agreed that we will run a common SGUC campaign for the 2006 local elections as for the 2005 general election. A discussion will be opened on additions especially relevant to local government for the current agreed SGUC common political platform.
SP will be focusing their efforts in the 2006 local elections on Coventry and Lewisham, but will run elsewhere. AGS will focus on running several candidates in Leeds, but will run elsewhere. AWL has one prospective candidacy, in Hackney, east London.
The committee also agreed, in diluted form, the proposal for a SGUC campaign on pensions first proposed on AWL’s behalf by Pete Radcliff at the previous SGUC meeting.
What’s proposed is a joint campaign in the form of stalls, petitions, leaflets, posters etc agitating for decent pensions for all, to be achieved by taxing the rich — a much-increased basic state pension without means-testing, and defence of public provision.
Obviously AWL is unlikely to be able to campaign jointly with the SP within the unions on the question of pensions, given what we see as their compliance with the trade union leaders’ avoidance of industrial action on the issue. But we could perfectly well do a joint street-stall and public-meeting campaign without compromising debate on trade-union policy. Indeed the joint activity would increase the possibilities for having out the debate between AWLers and SPers.
Perhaps aware of that, the SP was reluctant to agree to joint activity. Eventually it agreed to a joint SGUC leaflet, poster, and petition on the issue, though it would not commit itself to actually using the petition.
Joint stalls and meetings should be possible where local SGUC activists agree.
www.workersliberty.org/sguc
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
AWL lies re SP
The excerpt below is from the latest issue of the Socialist I have a lot of time for AWL and its orientation to the trade unions but if you continue to print lies and distortions then you will lose all credibility.
These proposals are worse than the proposals which were on the table last March. It's quite clear now that the trade unions are going to have to begin preparing for industrial action across the public sector.
The next round of talks are on 8 October. If the government refuses to back down from these proposals, we should immediately make plans for an industrial action ballot. UNISON's national leadership are already talking about the necessity of strike action to defend ourselves against these attacks.
Lies?
I can't quite see what you think is a "lie".
I would think that what the article is referring to is SP members voting to call off industrial action just before the General Election this year - for example, on the PCS Executive.
It is one thing to publish an article in your newspaper advocating industrial action - but, as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words.
SP
I agree with Janine.
The Socialist Party, SWP and others in supporting the leadership's claim that the government's supposed 'backdown' in the face of the threat of action was a victory (or half a victory?) was wrong.
The SP did not criticise the Unison leadership for calling off the action. (If SP or its representatives on Unison's Local Government Exec / NEC did oppose the leadership then can someone say when and where?)
Following this in other unions such as NUT conference the SP supported the leadership calling off action because Unison had called off action.
To now say in The Socialist that proposals are worse than before, is exactly what we said before the election. Calling off the action, when we were at our strongest in the run up to the election was wrong, it was a totally mistaken strategy, we had won nothing, and these new proposals prove it.
So we need to unite now to force the union leaders to get the strategy right, this time.
It would be more honest if the SP leadership or membership said they made a mistake in supporting the calling off of the first ballot (and i think it is reasonable for people to point out that mistake) but if you are happy to work with us to build a rank and file campaign to make sure the leadership do not make this mistake again, then its at least a step forward.
I would be keen to know what the SP reps on PCS, Unison NECs are proposing as a strategy for this campaign.
unity
As an SP member, i would agree with the AWL take that the SP made a mistake by not calling for industrial action before the general election. I don't think this puts us in the same box as the SWP or respect, as we still fight for a non-sectarian socialist future. I believe that what is more important than arguments over our differences is that socialists unite in similarities. Far too many on the left see other leftist groups as the enemy. It would be far easier to unite to fight against the NF and BNP, privatisation, and the destruction of our enviroment than continuosly bicker amongst ourselves. Lets use these common goals to come together and fight against new labour's crimes.
(apologies for the slight dip in intellectual standing, i'm only young)
but isnt the problem what SP are saying now?
It's good to see you think the SP made a mistake not to support action before the general election. But, (and this is an important but) the Socialist Party are now supporting the union leaderships in the present deal in health, teaching and civil service. You can read more why this is wrong by reading pensions stuff on this site. But in brief:
a) the deal the SP supports creates a two tier workforce on pensions (agreeing to keep retirement at 60 for present workers, while selling out the future workers... )
b) the deal creates a further division between groups of public sector workers (leaviing council workers and fire fighters negotiate on their own)
c) At the point when New Labour, Blair and Brown are loosing the grip on the party and have just lost their first vote in parliament, the SP are allowing the union leaders to back away from a united labour movement battle with them.
So though the new call for a new workers party by the SP would be under normal circumstances very welcome. Wouldnt it sound more realistic from an organisation that was organising a fight in the unions to take on Blair on pensions (not just for existing workers) but for future workers, for workers across public and private sector and for relinking state pensions to earnings.
Unfortunately the SP in PCS, Unison and NUT have welcomed the deal, and allowed leadership to avoid this battle that could have united the opposition to Blair in parliament to one in the workplace, picket lines and on the streets.
Wouldnt we as socialists be a lot happier to see workers giving Blair and Brown a defeat rather than labour MPs (mostly soft left) and Liberal MPs in parliament.
If I have misunderstood the SPs position or if they have a another plan to win a united victory on pensions, please let us know