21 June 2011
A Pause
As posting has become more infrequent, I'm going to go offline on this blog for a while. I'm intending to come back, but it will have to be when I've got the time available to do it once again, which could be a while.
14 June 2011
Threat of Redundancy
Like many others out there at the moment, my job is at risk. Tomorrow I submit a form that will be assessed by my college. Many others who I work with will do the same. On Friday a number of people will find out they don't have a job any more. It isn't a nice situation.
The last time I was in this situation was the morning after the European Election results in 2009. I'd just spent five years of my life working part time and devoting as much time as I could to win a Euro seat for the Greens in the North West region. We lost, narrowly, and 10 hours later I was told that unless I could relocate to London, I'd be redundant from my part-time job.
So for the very many of you out there who have jobs under threat or know a friend, relative or loved one who is at risk of losing their job, I know how you feel. That is why it is particularly galling to hear the leader of the Labour Party, equate benefit claimants to the boardroom. As A Place to Write puts it:
"When Ed Miliband promised to tackle the “take what you can culture” from the “boardroom to the benefits system” I couldn’t help but think he must be joking. Comparing the boardroom- where salaries are set to rise to one hundred and forty five times national median earnings, to the benefits system, which barely supports the 2.5 million people who are scrambling for five hundred thousand jobs, many of which offer pay which wouldn’t push them above the poverty line- seems like a joke doesn’t it?"
The last time I was in this situation was the morning after the European Election results in 2009. I'd just spent five years of my life working part time and devoting as much time as I could to win a Euro seat for the Greens in the North West region. We lost, narrowly, and 10 hours later I was told that unless I could relocate to London, I'd be redundant from my part-time job.
So for the very many of you out there who have jobs under threat or know a friend, relative or loved one who is at risk of losing their job, I know how you feel. That is why it is particularly galling to hear the leader of the Labour Party, equate benefit claimants to the boardroom. As A Place to Write puts it:
"When Ed Miliband promised to tackle the “take what you can culture” from the “boardroom to the benefits system” I couldn’t help but think he must be joking. Comparing the boardroom- where salaries are set to rise to one hundred and forty five times national median earnings, to the benefits system, which barely supports the 2.5 million people who are scrambling for five hundred thousand jobs, many of which offer pay which wouldn’t push them above the poverty line- seems like a joke doesn’t it?"
9 June 2011
Left on the Shelf
Before I get onto the main content, I just want to state that my intention here is to play the ball, not the individual player, so any criticism is general and not specific to any one party or organisation, but an attempt to give a genuine overview of politics to the left of Labour after 2010. Respect are currently undertaking a review of their position after the 2011 local election results, but they have been, and in places remain, a credible electoral presence. This post primarily considers the future electoral role of socialist parties.
When you google “mass socialist party” 78,900 hits come up. Those explicitly socialist (and communist) parties to the left of Labour seem to me to be the last true believers. From what I've been able to ascertain, the total membership of Socialist political parties in the UK is likely to be around 10,000. [I’d welcome anyone who can provide figures and a credible link for completeness]
I'll start with some cold facts and figures. Membership levels based on the Electoral Commission party accounts in 2010 were:
Democratic Socialist Alliance (People Before Profit) – not stated
Socialist Alliance - 102
Socialist Alternative – not stated (election umbrella)
Socialist Equality Party – not stated
Socialist Labour Party – 3,260
Socialist Party of Great Britain – not stated
Socialist Peoples Party – 44
Socialist Studies Party – not stated (inactive)
Socialist Unity – not stated (inactive)
Solidarity – 450
Scottish Socialist Party – not stated
TUSC – not stated (election umbrella)
The Socialist Party (not listed in the Electoral Commission Accounts) claims over 2,000 members in 2011.
To quote someone who commented on a Socialist Unity thread, “Calculating SWP membership numbers is a bit like trying to hold water in your hand”. The estimates I’ve seen are around 3,500 but it is difficult to establish what criteria is actually used to define membership. [Again any info welcomed on this].
A lot of people blamed the SLP and NO2EU (a forerunner of TUSC) for our narrow loss to the BNP in the North West in 2009. It is an easy conclusion to draw. The Greens were 0.3% short of beating the BNP, the SLP gained 1.6% and NO2EU gained 1.4%. Our research suggests that 3 out of 10 NO2EU supporters would have voted Green as a second preference. But as I’ve previously stated, I and others felt the biggest single contributing factor was due to misinformation delivered by a larger party in red.
It is simply a fact that in pretty much every list election under a proportional system since the voting reforms introduced for certain elections by the Labour government at the end of the 1990s, Socialist Parties have managed to capture 1 to 3% of the vote, even in elections with genuine Proportional Representation. It is likely they continue to go on handing over lost deposits in most of the bigger elections for the foreseeable future. To Green colleagues who feel this way - we shouldn't be angry over this or get annoyed at socialist candidates standing and "splitting the vote" - this is simply an electoral reality, to be anticipated and acknowledged.
So with such longevity and with reasonably substantial memberships (the Greens had less than 5,000 members as recently as 2004) why has there been such ineffectiveness (with some exceptions of course) of parties with the word “socialist” in their name within the electoral arena? I’d posit four possible reasons:
1. Many people who are socialist still vote Labour or vote Green. Many Labour members still regard themselves as socialists (even if other socialists disagree). Joe Anderson, leader of Liverpool City Council, is one example, stating "I'm a trade unionist. I'm a socialist. I've been one all my life and as far as I'm concerned…" Likewise, there are Greens who regard themselves as socialist, eco-socialist or “on the left” of politics, our former Principal Speaker Derek Wall, being an obvious example.
2. Socialism is associated with repression, totalitarianism and an absence of democracy. I’m not saying that is an accurate perception of what socialism is, but that it is simply how the vast majority of non-politicised people react to the description. Even a strong leaflet campaign can’t overcome that barrier – persuading the majority of people of a contrary view can only really be tackled by door knocking and consistent work on behalf of the community.
3. Splits. The People’s Judean Front problem.
4. Socialist parties still being in awe of Trade Unions. This is a problem for two reasons. The Trade Unions do not have the power they once did. That is not to say that they are not influential or can’t be effective (I’m a Membership Secretary of my local branch of UCU and we’ve just seen them negotiate £30 off the annual registration fee with the IfL after a strong campaign). Secondly, most of the largest Trade Unions are linked with Labour, and with the exception of PCS and a number of Socialist Party activists who hold influential roles, there is simply no route in for a small socialist political organisation. Given that socialist parties don’t often have very wealthy members, there is no credible funding source.
The biggest electoral problem now for any party that is trying to attract voters who are explicitly on the left is that Labour is now in opposition. This has squeezed the political space outside of the Labour Party as voters, even socialist ones, hold their noses again and vote Labour in opposition to the Tory / Liberal Democrat coalition. These are going to be lean electoral times for socialist parties.
I think that most Greens will acknowledge that in the 2010 General Election, at a local level we also got squeezed hard. However this was more to do with an increased level of turnout that saw a (then) record number of Green votes in some council wards but losses of seats we had gained four years previously on lower turnouts. In contrast, local election results in 2011 show that our national support has returned to the 2007 level, but through effective electoral targeting we gained and now hold far more council seats than we did four years ago, and we also have the huge boost of our excellent MP in Parliament, Caroline Lucas.
This is no mean feat, considering that the 2007 local elections were at a time when Tony Blair was immensely unpopular, Labour had been in government for 10 years and the Iraq War, Labour’s introduction of Tuition Fees in breach of their manifesto promise and dark economic storm clouds on the horizon meant that many former Labour members and supporters had no hesitation voting Socialist, Green or Liberal Democrat instead.
In 2011 Ed Miliband has said Labour got it wrong on the Iraq War, that students should back Labour because the Tories / Lib Dems have introduced higher tuition fees and that the economy is in trouble because the coalition are cutting too far, too fast. Even so, Labour is still struggling to establish any consistent poll lead at a time when an effective opposition should be hammering this government. (Incidentally, they also seem to have an eye on a potential rival for votes).
After our results in 2010, there was a lot of internal discussion in the Greens about the potential for a squeeze, but we’ve shown that we are ready to deal with it, and indeed we will still make progress even in a political climate when Labour are in opposition. In a similar exercise, it sounds like Respect members are currently engaging in a similar process to work out where their priorities lie.
In conclusion, I think that socialist parties will need to seriously consider whether they continue to contest elections, or try and add what is in most cases marginal support to candidates from other parties. In elections over the next four years where proportional systems are used, I would expect that TUSC or another umbrella label will be used, with much the same result as in the previous 15 years (around 1 to 3%).
A mass socialist party is not credible in Britain in 2011 despite the most catastrophic economic circumstances. Indeed most socialists interested in influencing electoral politics in most areas of the country will have already joined Labour and the Greens.
Those who choose to remain in their particular socialist party (or work under a particular electoral umbrella) will have my admiration for their principled devotion to their position. I do understand what that is like. When I first stood in Liverpool in 2002, we barely had a functioning local Green Party, but what I could see was a clear way forward and a sense of purpose about what we could practically achieve - we have 2 councillors now and finished 2nd in two other wards this year. I expect further Green electoral progress locally and nationally.
What is crucial in my opinion is that there will be many people out there who are at this particular stage in their lives are ready to engage in something. Many more will now choose direct action organisations like UKUncut but the prolific activity of socialist parties at freshers fayres up and down the country will see some choose a decade or two in organisations that will be unable to win elections despite yearly promises of progress.
The struggles ahead of us are going to be tough and I respect anyone who fights for social justice or to protect the future for our children and grandchildren. Those who choose socialist parties will do so for principled reasons, but should be under no illusions that whatever influence they will have will be outside the electoral system not in it.
When you google “mass socialist party” 78,900 hits come up. Those explicitly socialist (and communist) parties to the left of Labour seem to me to be the last true believers. From what I've been able to ascertain, the total membership of Socialist political parties in the UK is likely to be around 10,000. [I’d welcome anyone who can provide figures and a credible link for completeness]
I'll start with some cold facts and figures. Membership levels based on the Electoral Commission party accounts in 2010 were:
Democratic Socialist Alliance (People Before Profit) – not stated
Socialist Alliance - 102
Socialist Alternative – not stated (election umbrella)
Socialist Equality Party – not stated
Socialist Labour Party – 3,260
Socialist Party of Great Britain – not stated
Socialist Peoples Party – 44
Socialist Studies Party – not stated (inactive)
Socialist Unity – not stated (inactive)
Solidarity – 450
Scottish Socialist Party – not stated
TUSC – not stated (election umbrella)
The Socialist Party (not listed in the Electoral Commission Accounts) claims over 2,000 members in 2011.
To quote someone who commented on a Socialist Unity thread, “Calculating SWP membership numbers is a bit like trying to hold water in your hand”. The estimates I’ve seen are around 3,500 but it is difficult to establish what criteria is actually used to define membership. [Again any info welcomed on this].
A lot of people blamed the SLP and NO2EU (a forerunner of TUSC) for our narrow loss to the BNP in the North West in 2009. It is an easy conclusion to draw. The Greens were 0.3% short of beating the BNP, the SLP gained 1.6% and NO2EU gained 1.4%. Our research suggests that 3 out of 10 NO2EU supporters would have voted Green as a second preference. But as I’ve previously stated, I and others felt the biggest single contributing factor was due to misinformation delivered by a larger party in red.
It is simply a fact that in pretty much every list election under a proportional system since the voting reforms introduced for certain elections by the Labour government at the end of the 1990s, Socialist Parties have managed to capture 1 to 3% of the vote, even in elections with genuine Proportional Representation. It is likely they continue to go on handing over lost deposits in most of the bigger elections for the foreseeable future. To Green colleagues who feel this way - we shouldn't be angry over this or get annoyed at socialist candidates standing and "splitting the vote" - this is simply an electoral reality, to be anticipated and acknowledged.
So with such longevity and with reasonably substantial memberships (the Greens had less than 5,000 members as recently as 2004) why has there been such ineffectiveness (with some exceptions of course) of parties with the word “socialist” in their name within the electoral arena? I’d posit four possible reasons:
1. Many people who are socialist still vote Labour or vote Green. Many Labour members still regard themselves as socialists (even if other socialists disagree). Joe Anderson, leader of Liverpool City Council, is one example, stating "I'm a trade unionist. I'm a socialist. I've been one all my life and as far as I'm concerned…" Likewise, there are Greens who regard themselves as socialist, eco-socialist or “on the left” of politics, our former Principal Speaker Derek Wall, being an obvious example.
2. Socialism is associated with repression, totalitarianism and an absence of democracy. I’m not saying that is an accurate perception of what socialism is, but that it is simply how the vast majority of non-politicised people react to the description. Even a strong leaflet campaign can’t overcome that barrier – persuading the majority of people of a contrary view can only really be tackled by door knocking and consistent work on behalf of the community.
3. Splits. The People’s Judean Front problem.
4. Socialist parties still being in awe of Trade Unions. This is a problem for two reasons. The Trade Unions do not have the power they once did. That is not to say that they are not influential or can’t be effective (I’m a Membership Secretary of my local branch of UCU and we’ve just seen them negotiate £30 off the annual registration fee with the IfL after a strong campaign). Secondly, most of the largest Trade Unions are linked with Labour, and with the exception of PCS and a number of Socialist Party activists who hold influential roles, there is simply no route in for a small socialist political organisation. Given that socialist parties don’t often have very wealthy members, there is no credible funding source.
The biggest electoral problem now for any party that is trying to attract voters who are explicitly on the left is that Labour is now in opposition. This has squeezed the political space outside of the Labour Party as voters, even socialist ones, hold their noses again and vote Labour in opposition to the Tory / Liberal Democrat coalition. These are going to be lean electoral times for socialist parties.
I think that most Greens will acknowledge that in the 2010 General Election, at a local level we also got squeezed hard. However this was more to do with an increased level of turnout that saw a (then) record number of Green votes in some council wards but losses of seats we had gained four years previously on lower turnouts. In contrast, local election results in 2011 show that our national support has returned to the 2007 level, but through effective electoral targeting we gained and now hold far more council seats than we did four years ago, and we also have the huge boost of our excellent MP in Parliament, Caroline Lucas.
This is no mean feat, considering that the 2007 local elections were at a time when Tony Blair was immensely unpopular, Labour had been in government for 10 years and the Iraq War, Labour’s introduction of Tuition Fees in breach of their manifesto promise and dark economic storm clouds on the horizon meant that many former Labour members and supporters had no hesitation voting Socialist, Green or Liberal Democrat instead.
In 2011 Ed Miliband has said Labour got it wrong on the Iraq War, that students should back Labour because the Tories / Lib Dems have introduced higher tuition fees and that the economy is in trouble because the coalition are cutting too far, too fast. Even so, Labour is still struggling to establish any consistent poll lead at a time when an effective opposition should be hammering this government. (Incidentally, they also seem to have an eye on a potential rival for votes).
After our results in 2010, there was a lot of internal discussion in the Greens about the potential for a squeeze, but we’ve shown that we are ready to deal with it, and indeed we will still make progress even in a political climate when Labour are in opposition. In a similar exercise, it sounds like Respect members are currently engaging in a similar process to work out where their priorities lie.
In conclusion, I think that socialist parties will need to seriously consider whether they continue to contest elections, or try and add what is in most cases marginal support to candidates from other parties. In elections over the next four years where proportional systems are used, I would expect that TUSC or another umbrella label will be used, with much the same result as in the previous 15 years (around 1 to 3%).
A mass socialist party is not credible in Britain in 2011 despite the most catastrophic economic circumstances. Indeed most socialists interested in influencing electoral politics in most areas of the country will have already joined Labour and the Greens.
Those who choose to remain in their particular socialist party (or work under a particular electoral umbrella) will have my admiration for their principled devotion to their position. I do understand what that is like. When I first stood in Liverpool in 2002, we barely had a functioning local Green Party, but what I could see was a clear way forward and a sense of purpose about what we could practically achieve - we have 2 councillors now and finished 2nd in two other wards this year. I expect further Green electoral progress locally and nationally.
What is crucial in my opinion is that there will be many people out there who are at this particular stage in their lives are ready to engage in something. Many more will now choose direct action organisations like UKUncut but the prolific activity of socialist parties at freshers fayres up and down the country will see some choose a decade or two in organisations that will be unable to win elections despite yearly promises of progress.
The struggles ahead of us are going to be tough and I respect anyone who fights for social justice or to protect the future for our children and grandchildren. Those who choose socialist parties will do so for principled reasons, but should be under no illusions that whatever influence they will have will be outside the electoral system not in it.
1 June 2011
Independence - An Anglo-Scot Perspective
My mother is English (Yorkshire) and my father Scottish, of Irish ancestry. I was born south of the border, but spent my formative years in Bo'ness before moving back again.
I've grew up with antipathy towards the term British - British Empire, British Imperialism (I've just read the Afghan Wars 1839-1919) and British government. Unsurprising in the 1980s in Scotland. As I've grown older and appreciated the perspective of Asian and Black people, who are 4th or 5th generation British (like me), I've mellowed a bit. So what are my thoughts about my former home, with a lot of my extended family living there, becoming an independent country and me effectively becoming English rather than British?
It will not make much practical difference to my experience of crossing the border as an independent Scotland would remain in Europe. I also hold the view that Scotland and the people that live there should be in charge of that decision, and I think it would be in Scotland’s interests in the very long term to be an independent nation within the EU.
Unionists in Scotland should be wary of underestimating Alex Salmond. His eye will be on the timing of the referendum. The SNP does not need the majority of Scottish people to vote for full independence consistently, he only needs them to do it once. He’ll be looking for an alignment of issues in a time period that will drive up pro-independence support. A few months ago the polls suggested the SNP would lose power at Holyrood, so the fact that opinion polls don’t point to a win for full independence should be noted, but the accepted wisdom that Scotland won’t vote for full independence is in my view wrong.
Issues that might enhance Scottish nationalist sentiments in the coming years will be the British Olympic football team (imagine the situation if not a single Scot is in the starting XI), the Scottish government taking positions fundamentally at odds with the UK government when voting in European Council of Ministers and the forthcoming energy crisis. Right now, all eyes are on the SNP as they try and tackle the sectarian crisis in Scottish football that has flared up this season. I think this is a key test in winning and keeping the confidence of the people I share heritage with, Scots with Irish ancestry.
On a greener political slant, Scotland is blessed with huge natural and renewable resources. At a time when the German and Japanese governments have committed to a renewable and non-nuclear future, Scotland can and should be committed to the same, not just under an SNP government, but with an all party consensus. Nuclear will look less attractive, particularly if the relatively uninhabited parts of Scotland are in the running for nuclear disposal, even the low level variety.
For me, the issue that most vexes me is the political implications for the UK without Scotland. England is a Conservative country. My city Liverpool certainly isn’t, but if you look at post war election results, the nation of England has statistically shown a much higher level of Conservative support than the UK as a whole.
In the recent AV referendum, the rank and file of the Labour Party, including many of their councillors, rejected and campaigned against the option of Alternative Voting. Ed Miliband got it right, and his rank and file largely got it wrong.
Should Scotland choose independence, First Past the Post in England will consistently deliver Conservative majorities. The sting in the tail for those in (English) Labour who campaigned against AV would be Scottish independence and Tory dominance of the remaining UK. One thing is for sure, we'll all be looking north with great interest.
I've grew up with antipathy towards the term British - British Empire, British Imperialism (I've just read the Afghan Wars 1839-1919) and British government. Unsurprising in the 1980s in Scotland. As I've grown older and appreciated the perspective of Asian and Black people, who are 4th or 5th generation British (like me), I've mellowed a bit. So what are my thoughts about my former home, with a lot of my extended family living there, becoming an independent country and me effectively becoming English rather than British?
It will not make much practical difference to my experience of crossing the border as an independent Scotland would remain in Europe. I also hold the view that Scotland and the people that live there should be in charge of that decision, and I think it would be in Scotland’s interests in the very long term to be an independent nation within the EU.
Unionists in Scotland should be wary of underestimating Alex Salmond. His eye will be on the timing of the referendum. The SNP does not need the majority of Scottish people to vote for full independence consistently, he only needs them to do it once. He’ll be looking for an alignment of issues in a time period that will drive up pro-independence support. A few months ago the polls suggested the SNP would lose power at Holyrood, so the fact that opinion polls don’t point to a win for full independence should be noted, but the accepted wisdom that Scotland won’t vote for full independence is in my view wrong.
Issues that might enhance Scottish nationalist sentiments in the coming years will be the British Olympic football team (imagine the situation if not a single Scot is in the starting XI), the Scottish government taking positions fundamentally at odds with the UK government when voting in European Council of Ministers and the forthcoming energy crisis. Right now, all eyes are on the SNP as they try and tackle the sectarian crisis in Scottish football that has flared up this season. I think this is a key test in winning and keeping the confidence of the people I share heritage with, Scots with Irish ancestry.
On a greener political slant, Scotland is blessed with huge natural and renewable resources. At a time when the German and Japanese governments have committed to a renewable and non-nuclear future, Scotland can and should be committed to the same, not just under an SNP government, but with an all party consensus. Nuclear will look less attractive, particularly if the relatively uninhabited parts of Scotland are in the running for nuclear disposal, even the low level variety.
For me, the issue that most vexes me is the political implications for the UK without Scotland. England is a Conservative country. My city Liverpool certainly isn’t, but if you look at post war election results, the nation of England has statistically shown a much higher level of Conservative support than the UK as a whole.
In the recent AV referendum, the rank and file of the Labour Party, including many of their councillors, rejected and campaigned against the option of Alternative Voting. Ed Miliband got it right, and his rank and file largely got it wrong.
Should Scotland choose independence, First Past the Post in England will consistently deliver Conservative majorities. The sting in the tail for those in (English) Labour who campaigned against AV would be Scottish independence and Tory dominance of the remaining UK. One thing is for sure, we'll all be looking north with great interest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)