|
Weekly Worker 412 Thursday December 13 2001
Welsh Socialist Alliance
Resignation and retreat
Adramatic resignation from the Socialist Workers Party by a leading member
in Gwent during the middle of the Welsh Socialist Alliance national council
meeting in Wrexham on December 9 has highlighted the imminent crisis facing
the Socialist Alliance project in the principality.
The background to Richard Morse’s decision to quit the SWP lay in that
organisation’s decision last month to submit a constitutional amendment
for January’s WSA annual conference proposing a major overhaul of its
constitution (see ‘Why I resigned from the SWP’ below). Virtually identical
in essence to the SWP proposals ratified at the December 1 London conference
of the Socialist Alliance in England, the amendment submitted takes little
or no account of the very different circumstances facing the WSA.
As reported in previous editions of the Weekly Worker, the WSA
is the weakest link in the alliance project in Great Britain. Not only
has it been unable to achieve anything comparable to the Scottish Socialist
Party; it also lags dreadfully behind the project in England, where some
kind of momentum was built up in the general election campaign, even if
it was allowed to fall away since.
Lacking a Tommy Sheridan or a Dave Nellist and not possessing in its
ranks the calibre of the London-based leaders of the main political affiliates,
the WSA was always going to face a more difficult task in mobilising the
socialists in Wales to its banner. Without a national office or full-timer,
the difficulties of trying to become an efficient, professional organisation
are further compounded.
Yet this has only been one element of the WSA’s problems. Although it
emerged largely as a result of negotiations between the Socialist Party
and the left nationalist grouping, Cymru Goch, in 1998, neither of these
organisations has consistently backed the WSA project. Throughout the
alliance’s short history, the SP has been content to put the WSA on the
back burner, always happier to build its sect project. At times the SP
has played a profoundly negative role, fully deserving the contempt many
WSA activists have for it.
Since the last conference in January 2001 Cymru Goch has also become
a semi-detached member of the alliance, losing faith in the prospects
of the WSA evolving on similar lines to the SSP. CG has been content to
propagandise about a Welsh Socialist Party, but no longer sees the WSA
as likely to have a meaningful role in such a process.
The decision of the SWP to enter the WSA in the second half of 2000 did,
however, open the prospect of ending the paralysis that had already affected
the WSA. The SWP is the largest left group in Wales, though relatively
much smaller than in either England or Scotland, and the undoubted energy
and dynamism that SWP members could bring appeared to offer the opportunity
for the WSA to overcome its isolation.
This was certainly the case up to the general election. SWP members threw
themselves into building the alliance, helping to establish branches where
none existed before and energising branches already established. The fact
that the WSA was able to stand six parliamentary candidates (despite opposition
to this by the SP) and gain a party election broadcast was testament to
the positive role played by the SWP.
However, since June 7, the SWP has played an increasingly negative role
in the WSA, albeit not on the scale of the SP. The SWP has preferred to
operate through its front organisations - the Anti-Nazi League, Globalise
Resistance, Stop the War Coalition, etc - and relegated the WSA to a secondary
pastime of some of its members. Thus SWP, not WSA, speakers have been
billed to speak at public meetings against the war. Only where non-aligned
members have some influence (eg, in Gwent) has this tendency to downgrade
the WSA been counteracted.
Such is the current state of affairs in the WSA that it must now perhaps
be the only political organisation on the face of the planet to have failed
to take a stance on the events of September 11 and the ensuing war in
Afghanistan. Branches of the WSA meet infrequently, the SWP only rekindling
enthusiasm for the alliance when it comes to elections (as in the Swansea
East by-election in September). One does not need to be a cynic to be
deeply concerned about the WSA in the SWP’s scheme of things.
So it would require a good amount of tact and persuasion on the SWP’s
part if its proposals for revamping the constitution were not to be treated
by others with extreme caution. With current membership of the WSA counted
in the tens and not the hundreds, even loyal SWP members were bound to
wonder about the future of an organisation that, assuming the SP left
as a result, would be little more than the SWP, a handful of Workers Power
and CPGB supporters and some non-aligned members (given that CG is also
preparing to leave if the conference does not support its demand for an
independent socialist Wales).
Unfortunately, unlike in England, the SWP in Wales has not even bothered
to try to sell its ideas to WSA members. Led by a new full-timer in Cardiff
who must think that subtlety is a bourgeois concept, the SWP has of late
been behaving with all the grace of a bull in a china shop. Even before
its constitutional amendment had even been sent out to WSA members, the
SWP chair of the WSA, Martin Chapman, was already privately emailing certain
people to invite them on to the SWP’s slate for the national executive
(a committee which does not as yet exist).
Yet whilst comrade Chapman was starting the private charm offensive,
no attempt was made by the SWP to engage the wider layers of the WSA membership
in debate about its proposals. No suggestions to have the debate take
place in the branches, nor to produce a document, as in England, to raise
awareness of the issues at stake. Not even on the official egroup of the
WSA did any member of the SWP bother to explain and justify its proposals
(despite comrade Morse’s request that they do so). It does not take a
genius to work out that the SWP machine in Wales was trying to avoid any
debate at all with WSA members.
Clearly, this did not have to be the case. Unfortunately the SWP in Wales
does not have the tactical acumen to recognise that WSA members cannot
be treated like the SWP rank and file. Attempts made by comrade Morse
to encourage such an approach within the SWP were not always met with
a comradely response. Shame.
Thus, when the national council met on December 9 (attended by five -
soon to be four - members of the SWP, two SPers, one member each of the
CPGB and CG and three independents), it was obvious that the SWP proposals
would dominate the meeting, especially given the SP’s walkout in London
the previous weekend. Little did we know though what was about to happen.
The first bone of contention was the venue of the conference, to be held
on January 20. A challenge was made over the way the decision had been
taken at the previous NC meeting. The chair, non-aligned socialist Jack
Gilbert, accepted that the decision had fallen foul of the bureaucratic
rule stipulating that no organisation should have more than 40% of voting
rights. Consequently, a new vote was taken, with three suggestions being
made: the SWP proposed Cardiff, the SP Rhayader in mid-Wales and the CPGB
Merthyr in the south Wales valleys.
Most in the room knew what was at stake with this vote. If the SWP got
Cardiff, then they would easily carry the day. SWP members are not good
travellers. And they would not need to engage the WSA in a debate prior
to the conference about their amendment. The purpose of the CPGB proposal
for Merthyr was to seek a compromise so that debate would then focus on
the SWP’s proposals and not backbiting about the conference venue.
At this point the meeting temporarily broke up. Given that the SWP contingent
had over 40% of those attending (41.67% by my calculations!), one of the
SWP’s five members would have to abstain from voting. No need to guess
whom the SWP selected - comrade Morse of course. Yet at this point Richard
called his comrades’ bluff. Disgusted at their attempts to foist on the
WSA their amendment, he announced he would resign immediately from the
SWP and vote as an independent. After the Merthyr option fell, comrade
Morse - voting rights miraculously restored - cast the decisive vote in
favour of Rhayader. The SWP contingent were none to pleased.
Later, discussion moved on to the conference itself. Steve Bell, an independent
and WSA candidate in Torfaen, kicked off the discussion by stating that
the SWP’s proposals were ill conceived, given the tiny size of the WSA.
Although disgusted by the SP’s withdrawal from the SA in England, he felt
it would be ill-conceived to offer the green light to the SP to repeat
it in Wales. He asked the SWP to withdraw its proposals.
At this stage an SP member took offence at the notion that the SP had
any intention of walking out of the WSA if the SWP amendment went through.
He then flatly contradicted himself when he said he would have “great
difficulty” staying in the WSA if the amendment was passed. At this stage
the SWP comrades were still refusing to comment on their amendment, feeling
that it was not the concern of the national council.
The CPGB contribution noted that there was much of merit in the SWP’s
amendment, even though it contained within it the seeds of future SWP
domination. After all, majorities should have the right to be majorities.
However, the amendment only made sense in the context where the WSA merged
with the SA in a single organisation. This would be a good thing. Yet,
without this commitment from the SWP to a united Socialist Alliance, then
the virtual basket case that the WSA has become would have a constitution
quite inappropriate to its stage of development. Whilst the SWP continues
to dodge the national question, there would always be a problem transferring
English solutions to a separate Welsh alliance project.
At this point, Julian Goss of the SWP brought a rabbit out of the hat.
Aware that all his opponents, except the SP, are pro-partyists (although
most adhere to the WSP model, rather than the CPGB model of an all-Britain
party), he began a belated defence of the amendment by stating that by
passing it we would be moving on the road to a party! An interesting interpretation,
given that the SWP leadership has been most careful to avoid using this
argument in England. Let us hope his central committee endorses it. It
may be currently lost on his leadership, but Julian had a good point -
there is a definite pro-party logic inherent in the Socialist Alliance
project. We wait to see whether he continues to take up this theme.
Comrade Gilbert then proposed a compromise formula. He asked that the
SWP withdraw the amendment at January’s conference. Instead, the WSA would
hold a constitutional convention in May where we could discuss the constitution
in the context of the national question and the party question. The SWP
refused to withdraw the amendment, but nevertheless the national council
voted by nine to three to go ahead with the convention. One of the SWP
contingent voted for this proposal, as did a non-aligned member who had
actually seconded the SWP’s constitutional amendment.
It is to be hoped that the SWP will reflect upon this vote. The WSA deserves
to have a reasonable period of time where it can openly debate party,
constitution and the national question in a fully rounded way. It would
actually be tactically astute for the SWP to delay its proposals to avoid
future accusations that it is shunning debate. Ultimately, however, if
the SWP wants its constitutional amendment passed, then it will probably
get its way. I hear, though, that the SWP leadership has been leaning
on its comrades in Wales to withdraw their proposals.
The CPGB believes, in particular, that an open and honest debate on the
national question is both vital and inevitable. The WSA officially adopts
a curious position. In its document, Towards a socialist Wales,
agnosticism on the national question (there is no recognition of the right
of the people of Wales to self-determination) intertwines with a nationalist-reformist
set of practical policies which seem to ignore the fact that Wales is
part of the UK state: for example, the demand for “free travel on all
Welsh trains, buses and ferries for pensioners”. This amounts to an implicit
concession to nationalism - neither the SP nor the SWP is prepared to
openly and honestly argue for unity. Nor are they prepared to challenge
the damaging division of socialists in Britain into national/royal units.
For a start the WSA should take up the Socialist Alliance’s offer of a
representative on its leadership.
Unless the politics of the national question are brought out into the
open, the WSA will remain at sea and risk paralysis. Undoubtedly, the
struggle itself will decide. Communists must champion the right of self-determination
for Wales and Scotland, but we will, at the same time, argue and work
for the closest political unity of revolutionaries and all workers in
Wales, Scotland and England against the UK state.
Our slogan, whether we be in the kingdom of England, kingdom of Scotland
or the principality of Wales, is: ‘One state, one Socialist Alliance party’.
Cameron Richards
Why I resigned from the SWP
It is very difficult to formally break with an organisation that you
have supported for getting on for nearly 25 years, from the first Marxism
in North London Poly in 1977, and been a member of for nine. It’s especially
difficult when you believe that the SWP is the most dynamic and energetic
organisation on the left with the best publications and a general political
analysis of the world that cannot be faulted.
However, for me the survival of the Welsh Socialist Alliance project
in Wales is essential for the left and essential for the attainment for
that rational world that we all are struggling for. The constitutional
proposal from the SWP for the WSA conference in January will lead to a
divisive, acrimonious conference with splits and the probable disappearance
of WSA activity from North and Mid-Wales. Given that the WSA is generally
very weak, with a lower electoral base than the Socialist Labour Party,
such an outcome could lead to the dissolution of the WSA.
As someone who has been central to building the WSA branch in Gwent,
the only branch in Wales that stood an independent as a candidate in the
general election, I feel it is my duty to try to protect these gains.
As a result when the vote came at the national council on the location
of the conference the only way to ensure that the widest possible range
of views could be heard was by supporting moving the venue to mid-Wales
and thus I was forced to resign in order to support this.
I hope that the SWP will accept the proposal from the overwhelming majority
of the national council to place their proposal for consideration by a
constitution commission over the next six months and we can have a conference
that can be a springboard for significant growth over the next few months.
Richard Morse
Print this page
|