Weekly Worker 560 Thursday November 10 2005

Going to conference

CPGB member Dave Isaacson has been selected a delegate to Respect conference

Calderdale Respect met in Halifax last on November 2 to select delegates to represent the branch at the national conference and choose a local steering committee. We also had a short discussion on the list of motions tabled for conference, having already debated our own at a previous meeting.

Two local SWP members had asked me earlier in the day, at a Unite Against Fascism demonstration in Leeds, if I would like to go to conference or be on the steering committee. I said yes, and they seemed pleased with this.

In the actual meeting the chairperson, Kevin Stannard (SWP), once again asked if anyone wanted to be a delegate. We have 20 members locally and are therefore entitled to two delegates. I indicated that I would like to be a delegate. Local SWP members were keen that people other than them should go, “for the experience”. They also seem to be keen that the rest of us should be brought into the central processes of Respect. In the end the meeting agreed that I should be a delegate alongside Dave, a PCSU activist, with an SWP member as reserve.

The attitude of SWP members to the local steering committee was inclusive too. If people were prepared to commit themselves to regular attendance then they should be accepted. Very different to some of the reports we have coming from other areas. Because of the low attendance at this meeting we decided to keep the list open for others who want to be on the steering committee.

We then had a brief discussion of some of the motions being put to conference. Most were seeing them for the first time and with 60 motions to go through our discussion could hardly be comprehensive. One comrade noted that there was no resolution on education in response to the bill just introduced by the government. It was agreed that she should draft one, and after it is checked by other members, the branch should try and get it heard as an emergency motion.

My fellow delegate highlighted a number of motions that he had problems with. Motion 48, which calls for a “discussion of western and islamic attitudes to economic policy”, was widely criticised. It was agreed that there is no single western or islamic approach to economics and that this kind of formulation was dangerous. The comrade from the PCS also opposed motion 49, which is against the use of anti-social behaviour orders, saying that it would not go down well in working class areas.

SWP comrades were against asbos, but some did not think that the age of criminal responsibility should be “raised from 10 to 16 years of age”. One talked about the problem with Respect being a reformist organisation - it clearly puts them in a difficult position when discussing solutions to the problems of capitalism.

There was also an interesting discussion concerning motion 52, which opposes all immigration controls. Dave, the PCS member and the other delegate, argued against saying that it would not attract working class voters. He expressed the opinion that if put into practice it would mean “chaos”. I argued strongly in favour. I explained how immigration controls divide workers and provide employers with a source of worst paid, unprotected labour.

SWP members were split on the issue - two against and one for. It will be interesting to see how many of their comrades vote for motion 52 under the eye of John Rees at conference.

Print this page