|
Weekly Worker 611 Thursday February 9 2006
Subscribe to the Weekly
Worker
Respect Party Platform founding statement
It all helps
At 15,640, our web readership was considerably up last week
compared to the recent period. But that doesn’t stop me making my
usual complaint - again nobody used the online facility to make
a donation to our fighting fund.
However, a couple of useful gifts that arrived by snail mail helped
save my bacon. Thank you, JH, for your £30 cheque and you, DP, for
the £20 postal order. Thanks also to our number one fan in Norway,
comrade SW, for his usual monthly contribution of £15.
Added to that I have another new standing order to report - just
£5 a month from comrade EB, but it all helps, and our total of extra
regular donations is rising slowly.
Also rising slowly is our February fund - the above gifts only
amount to £70 towards our £600 target. And don’t forget - this is
a short month of only 28 days and we are one third of way into it!
We could do with a nice increase to match our website
hits. Anyone out there like to help us out?
Robbie Rix
Click
here for our special financial appeal
Click
here to download a standing order form - regular income is particular
important in order to plan ahead. Even £5/month can help!
Send cheques, payable to Weekly Worker, BCM Box 928, London WC1N
3XX
Donate
online:
|
Statement of objectives
Those of us who have come together to form the Respect Party Platform
are fully committed to building Respect. We think it is the most important
thing to have happened on the left in England for a very long time. It
reflects similar developments across Europe in recent years from the Left
Bloc in Portugal to the Scottish Socialist Party in Scotland.
Respect came out of the anti-war movement and was founded on socialist
principles. It was a positive response to the relentless rightward march
of New Labour and the need for an alternative this created. We have been
heartened by the success it has had during its still short existence,
in particular the results it achieved in the general election last year
and support it has won in the muslim community. This shows the kind of
long-term potential Respect uniquely has.
We were shocked, however, at the 2005 Respect conference, by the attitude
of leading members to resolutions from branches aimed at tackling the
problems Respect is experiencing and at improving its functioning - both
its democracy and its organisational effectiveness. Most of these resolutions
were agreed, yet speeches by leading members were openly dismissive of
them. The implication was that the views of these leading members were
more important than the decisions of the Respect conference and its elected
bodies.
It was argued that Respect is a coalition and not a party, and that coalitions
don’t need all this stuff. In the case of a regular publication it was
argued that it would actually be wrong to have it. The issue is not what
Respect is called. The point is that it is an effective political organisation
- both electorally and in campaigning. Any organisation with MPs and councillors,
which presents itself as a political alternative at elections, has to
have basic democratic structures, procedures and accountability if it
is to go anywhere at all. The other pluralist left organisations in Europe
function as parties in this way.
Such organisations have to have procedures to decide policy collectively.
Those elected on such policy must be prepared to carry it out, or discuss
and find a solution. They must be prepared to be accountable to the organisation
for the decisions they take in their elected positions or in the wider
movement. Given the range of differences which inevitably exist within
Respect, there has to be a way to discuss, debate and develop policy between
conferences. There have to be well organised local branches with their
own political life. The elected committees must be the bodies that run
the organisation. At the moment there are problems in the way both the
officers’ committee and the national council function. Respect must be
seen as the most democratic, transparent and genuinely pluralist organisation
on the left.
Unless Respect is an organisation of this kind it will not be able to
hold new members for the long term. It will not be able to attract other
sections of the left, established activists and the trade union left into
its ranks. Such activists are committed to democracy and equality and
can only be attracted by a party which has its elected leadership operating
independently from its affiliated organisations, and which involves its
branches in the democratic process throughout the year. Nor will it be
able to attract young people from the anti-war or global justice movements
unless it functions in this way.
The situation is urgent. If Respect fails it would be a defeat for the
whole of the left from which it would be hard to recover. We think the
resolutions adopted by conference would develop Respect in this direction.
This is why we have established the Respect Party Forum as a network inside
Respect to work in an organised way for their implementation.
Our priority proposals are:
l Respect has to be built as
a mass membership party. This means a new emphasis on recruitment, and
a fresh approach to sections of the left currently not in it.
l Respect needs a stronger
national political profile, with its own publications, leaflets, pamphlets,
and a manifesto for regular use between elections.
l The national office needs
to be strengthened.
l The officers’ committee and
national council need to be more effective, develop greater authority,
and improve their connections to the local branches. Minutes of their
meetings should be available to branches and members.
l Structures are needed to
ensure the accountability of elected representatives.
l Steps have to be taken to
get Respect on a firm financial footing with transparent administrative
structures.
l Policy groups and special
interest groups need to be established to create more membership involvement
in Respect.
l We need an internal bulletin
and/or website facilities for discussion and debate so that differences
can be discussed and ideas developed.
This statement was agreed prior to the advent of the Big brother house,
but we think that it is an experience which reinforces the arguments we
have made above.
We hope that others will come forward and join us in this. We are not
interested in destructive criticism divorced from a positive approach
to building Respect. We are very interested in uniting with those who
share this approach.
Initial participants in the network are: Alan Thornett (national council),
John Lister (national council), Michael Coulston, Frances Hook, David
Leal, Harold Shalet and Amina Mangera (Greenwich and Lewisham Respect),
Liam McQuade (Tower Hamlets Respect), Sean Thompson (Camden and Barnet
Respect), Jim Rogers (Harlow Respect), Bob Whitehead and Manzoor Hussain
(Birmingham Respect), Greg Tucker (Lambeth Respect), Jane Kelly, John
Mulrenan, Dave Packer, Duncan Chapple and Karen O’Toole (Southwark Respect),
Roland Rance and Inbar Tamari (Waltham Forest Respect), Sheila Malone
and Fred Leplat (Islington Respect), Piers Mostyn, Sarah Parker and Doug
Thorpe (Enfield and Haringey Respect), Norman Traub (South Essex Respect),
Tony Traub (Brent and Harrow Respect).
info@respectpartyforum.org
Print this page
|