By John Pickard, Brentwood CLP delegate, personal capacity
Before dealing with the agenda of day 3, it is worth noting the detailed voting figures for the card votes on the Democracy Review, further clarifying the figures published yesterday. On card vote number 6, dealing with the method of election of the Party leader, 69% of CLPs voted against the NEC recommendation, largely on the grounds that they were opposed to the PLP having any veto (however small) on the process. On the other side, 97% of the trade union delegates supported the NEC. On Card vote 8, on the selection of parliamentary candidates, 66% of CLPs opposed the NEC, on the basis that ‘trigger’ ballots were a ‘negative’ and complex process open to challenge. Instead, these CLPs favoured ‘open selections’ for all CLPs. In this case, again, 97% of unions voted against. This shows the difference in views between the trade union and the CLP delegations, notwithstanding the retreat of the Momentum leadership on the question of parliamentary selection.
Second Deputy Leader
On the conference third day, there were more constitutional amendments being considered. Most of these were in the end either withdrawn or remitted, but the most significant one, perhaps, was that proposing the election of a second deputy leader, with a stipulation that at least one of the two be a woman. This was also remitted, on the grounds that the mover did not want a deputy leadership contest in what is possibly a pre-election period. It was nevertheless noteworthy that the NEC supported this amendment so that in the future there may be an additional deputy leader to act as a counter-weight to Tom Watson who has done a lot to undermine his leader and who has boycotted the conference. As a result of his disloyalty, he has little support among the membership of the party. Another resolution remitted was one on the future election of the General Secretary, delegates clearly annoyed at the ‘coronation’ of Jennie Formby, the only candidate, when Iain McNicol left office.
Brexit Composite resolution
The most important political debate in the morning session of the third day was on Brexit. The composite motion was the end result of a 5-hour meeting the night before, involving all those delegates whose CLPs had submitted contemporary motions on Brexit. This had chaired by Keir Starmer. For completeness, we publish here the full text:
Conference welcomes Jeremy Corbyn’s determined efforts to hold the Tories to account for their disastrous negotiations. Conference accepts that the public voted to leave the EU, but when people voted to ‘take back control’ they were not voting for fewer rights, economic chaos or to risk jobs. Conference notes the warning made by Jaguar Land Rover on 11.9.18, that without the right deal in place, tens of thousands of jobs there would be put at risk.
Conference notes that workers in industries across the economy in ports, food, pharmaceuticals, manufacturing, energy, chemicals, in our public services and beyond are worried about the impact of a hard Brexit on livelihoods and communities.
Conference believes we need a relationship with the EU that guarantees full participation in the Single Market. The Brexit deal being pursued by Theresa May is a threat to jobs, freedom of movement, peace in Northern Ireland and the NHS. Tory Brexit means a future of dodgy trade deals and American-style deregulation, undermining our rights, freedoms and prosperity. This binds the hands of future Labour governments, making it much harder for us to deliver on our promises.
Conference notes Labour has set six robust tests for the final Brexit deal.
Conference believes Labour MPs must vote against any Tory deal failing to meet these tests in full.
Conference also believes a no-deal Brexit should be rejected as a viable option and calls upon Labour MPs to vigorously oppose any attempt by this Government to deliver a no-deal outcome. Conference notes that when trade unions have a mandate to negotiate a deal for their members, the final deal is accepted or rejected by the membership. Conference does not believe that such important negotiations should be left to government ministers who are more concerned with self-preservation and ideology than household bills and wages.
Stagnant wages, crumbling services and the housing crisis are being exacerbated by the government and employers making the rich richer at working people’s expense, and not immigration.
Conference declares solidarity and common cause with all progressive and socialist forces confronting the rising tide of neo-fascism, xenophobia, nationalism and right-wing populism in Europe.
Conference resolves to reaffirm the Labour Party’s commitment to the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 including no hard border in Ireland.
Conference believes that there is no satisfactory technological solution that is compliant with the Good Friday Agreement and resolves to oppose any Brexit deal that would see the restoration of a border on the island of Ireland in any form for goods, services or people.
Should Parliament vote down a Tory Brexit deal or the talks end in no-deal, Conference believes this would constitute a loss of confidence in the Government. In these circumstances, the best outcome for the country is an immediate General Election that can sweep the Tories from power.
If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.
This should be the first step in a Europewide struggle for levelling-up of living standards, rights and services and democratisation of European institutions
Labour will form a radical government; taxing the rich to fund better public services, expanding common ownership, abolishing anti-union laws and engaging in massive public investment.
It was Keir Starmer who opened this discussion, more or less sticking with the text of the composite. Unfortunately, his speech, like the composite, included contradictory strands and ideas. Although there were references to class issues in both and there were some clear phrases and sentences socialists would support, in practice the main tone of the speech and the composite motion was based on the illusory notion that the working class and British capitalist class have an identity of interests.
Time and again, Starmer referred to “our country” and “British interests” as if the big banks and big business had the same interests as workers. Much the same, incidentally, is true of the ‘Peoples’ Vote’ campaign, which was very prominent at conference. There have been no calls for a ‘Peoples vote’ on 14 million people being in poverty, or on austerity, or on raising the national minimum wage to £10 an hour. Campaigns like the Peoples Vote gloss over the glaring differences in class interests between the rich and the rest of us and they threaten to repeat exactly the same error as in 2016, when the ‘Remain’ campaign had Labour right-wingers sharing platforms with Tories and business representatives. For many working-class voters, this was a huge turn-off and their ‘Leave’ vote became a protest against a comfortable political elite.
We should be clear that there is no identity of interests between the British working class and British capitalism. It might be correct to be opposed to a ‘Tory Brexit’ but it is not an alternative to be in favour of a ‘Tory Remain’ or anything similar. The central thrust of Labour’s approach must be to argue for policies in the interests of working-class people: on health, housing, jobs, services and on public ownership.
The market economy has failed in those key industries that Labour is going to re-nationalise – Royal Mail, railways, energy and water – and that is why the Party is advocating their public ownership in the first place. But it has also failed in relation to housing, the NHS, banking and finance and in other areas. Socialists do not accept the ‘market’ as the basis on which we should manage our economy. It is therefore wrong to call, as the Brexit resolution does, to say that “we” (presumably meaning British capitalism) need “a relationship with the EU that guarantees full participation in the Single Market”.
If the ‘market’ is failing British workers in all aspects of their lives and the economy, as indeed it is – not to mention for workers in the rest of Europe – the answer to that is not to fragment the large EU market into 28 smaller ‘national’ capitalist markets. But neither is it to pretend that the ‘single Market’ is the answer to the needs of British or European workers.
It was clear in the conference, however, that there was a mood that the Brexit process was a disaster and ought to be stopped. Correctly, the Labour leadership is putting the call for a General Election as their main priority, but even if that were to come about, what is implied in the resolution and in Keir Starmer’s speech is that a Labour Government will simply renegotiate a place for the UK within the EU market, rather than challenge the fundamental existence and rationale of the market. In the event, the resolution was passed overwhelmingly on a show of hands.
Government contracts
Another important debate centred on the outsourcing of public contracts and the provision of public contracts to rip-off companies. Two resolutions were presented, the first including the following:
“There will be a moratorium on any further privatisation by Labour-controlled local authorities, and that all Labour Groups be written to by the Labour Leader calling on them to bring services back in house at the earliest available opportunity.”
The second, moved by the FBU, and motivated by the Police and Crime Commission in one region taking over the Fire Service, included these points:
“Conference welcomes Labour’s commitment to bring back provision in-house of all public services. Conference calls for immediate investment in locally-provided public services, as part of a programme to repair the damage done by austerity. Conferences calls on the next Labour government to bring privatised services back into the public sector within the first year of its administration. Conference calls for a halt to any further privatisation by Labour-controlled local authorities and for Labour-controlled authorities to urgently begin the process of bringing any privatised back in-house.”
One trade union delegate after another came to the rostrum to complain about the decline in pay and conditions for workers and the reduced service that came from outsourcing, and both of these resolutions were passed unanimously on a show of hands.
Palestine
This was for most delegates a very emotive issue and on the floor of the conference many delegates waved Palestinian flags. There was overwhelming support for a composite motion on Palestine, calling, among other things for a British government “to increase its level of annual assessed contributions to UNRWA” and for “an independent international investigation into Israel’s use of force against Palestinian demonstrators, a freeze of UK Government arms sales to Israel; and an immediate unconditional end to the illegal blockade and closure of Gaza.”
It was interesting to listen to Shadow Foreign Minister, Emily Thornberry, opening this debate because she is a prominent member of the Labour Friends of Israel, who really ought to be renamed the Labour Friends of Netanayahu. She gave a barn-storming speech against racism, referencing the blackshirts in the 1930s, the National Front in the 1970s and the EDL today. But she only mentioning Palestine and the disgraceful policies of the Israeli government near the end of her speech. In what some delegates thought was an insult to Party members, she spent more time condemning the “racism” and supposed “anti-Semitism” in the Party than she did dealing with Palestinian rights, even though she must have been aware that it was next on the agenda.
When it came to the debate – it was hardly a debate, with no opposition to the motion – the mover of the composite was cheered more than any other mover had been in the whole three days and dozens of Palestinian flags waved around in the conference hall when he finished.
Windrush
In the same session dealing with Palestine, there were many black and Asian delegates speaking from the rostrum about their own and their own families’ experiences dealing with racist immigration and Home Office policies and the ‘hostile environment’ policy of the Tories. This followed a resolution on Windrush which called on an incoming Labour government to end the Tories hostile environment’ policy, close detention centres, end indefinite detention and fully compensate the victims of the Windrush scandal. It further called on Labour to scrap the Immigration Act of 2014.
One delegate, a man in his fifties and the son of Windrush migrants, described how he had been born, lived and worked (paying taxes) in the UK all his life, but was still asked to pay for medical treatment when he needed it in later years. The only possible logic for this affront was the colour of his skin.
Not surprisingly, the composites on Palestine and on Windrush were passed on a show of hands with no opposition. The resolutions may not have been perfect, but they show the strength of feeling on these issues in the Labour Party.
Bomb threat at fringe meeting
Finally, as we go to press, there is the news that a fringe meeting that was to show a film about the harassment then suspension of Jackie Walker, on spurious “anti-Semitism” charges, has had to be evacuated after a bomb threat. The Labour Friends of Israel have had fringe meetings on the periphery of the conference but have not been in evidence anywhere in the conference hall or its immediate environment. But the bomb threat to the Jackie Walker meeting shows that some perpetrators of the fake “anti-Semitism” charges are still determined to silence at least one critic of Israel at any cost.
September 25, 2018
