The response to Govan was immediate. Several Scottish members of parliament (MPs) blamed Labour's leadership for ignoring Scottish issues. They are demanding a more vigorous campaign from Labour in Scotland against the Tories. Neil Kinnock has set up an inquiry into the debacle, and the Scottish executive of the Labour Party has set up its own. It is likely that these two inquiries will reach different conclusions. One thing is clear: the major factor behind the SN's victory and Labour's dilemma has been the poll tax. Indeed, the SNP's title on the ballot papers was "Scottish National Party, No Poll Tax".
Just before the June 1987 general election, a piece of legislation passed virtually unnoticed through parliament. It was called the "Community charge legislation: Scotland", popularly known as the poll tax. This new tax, which replaces previous local property or rates taxes, was to be introduced in Scotland in April 1989, one year ahead of its introduction into England and Wales. During the election campaign, all the parties in Scotland, except the Tories, opposed this tax. In the last general elec14 tion, the Tories got only 24% of the vote and 10 out of 72 seats in Scotland (see /V
124). Because they hold the overall majority of seats in England, the Tories have persisted in imposing this tax against the wishes of 76% of Scots. This fact led many in the Labour Party to argue that the Tories had no mandate to impose the poll tax, and that Labour should vigorously oppose it.
A devastating effect on poor families
The poll tax is a flat-rate tax on all adults irrespective of income. Only the very poorest will receive any rebate, and even they must pay a minimum of 20%, or around £60 (about $110) per head. The tax will have a devastating effect on poor families, who may find their tax bill increased several times. Very wealthy families will gain thousands of pounds. Because each individual is liable for payment, huge data banks have been created containing everybody's name and address. Anyone changing address must from now on notify the government. Evasion from registering could result in fines of thousands of pounds. Each individual will have a unique reference number — in effect a national identity system is being introduced. The registrars can search virtually any existing data banks to look for evasions or falsifications. Such violations of civil liberty are unprecedented in Britain in peacetime.
Poll taxes have an unfortunate history in Britain. It was a poll tax that provoked the English Peasants' Revolt of 1381, several ministers being lynched before the rebellion was suppressed. The tax was subsequently repealed. No such tax has been imposed in Britain in recent centuries. The fact that such a tax is fairly high and not graduated makes it a unique tax in the modern world. The uniquely regressive nature of the tax led church leaders to denounce it as "immoral" and "wicked". The SNP claim it is illegal under the 1707 Treaty of Union with England. The Tories have no mandate to impose it, and up to 85% of Scots oppose the tax. The stage seems set for a major climb-down by the government or a mass campaign against the poll tax.
Given that they control local government in Scotland and have the majority of MPs, the Labour Party was expected to lead this fight. Their immediate reaction was inertia and delay. No guidance was given to local government, and so individual councils set up registration machinery. Eventually, local councils were told by Labour not to break the law, in other words, "please do administer the tax".
Faced with this, local government tradeunions cooperated with the registration machinery. By September 1987, the opportunity to block the tax administratively had been lost. Labour set up a "Stop It" campaign in October 1987, which was backed by the Scottish Trade Union Congress (STUC), but no tactics for stopping the tax were put forward. Meanwhile, the SNP launched its own campaign, and hinted that
Scotland
Pol
ON NOVEMBER 10, in a ma
National Party (SP) overturn to win the Glasgow Govan by-€ election campaign was the intr the poll tax, which Margaret proposing to implement in S against this tax has received n to a head nine years of d English-dom
The disarray of the two major t national question in Scotland popular support for an indepe than e GORDO
FOLL
they would call for non-payment of immediately denounced by the Labour leaders. It very quickly became clear that Labour hoped to block the English legislation in parliament, and when ference of the Labour Party, the key debate was on non-payment of the tax. Labour leaders feared that they would lose the vote if they simply said "pay". Under pressure from the STUC, they produced a package of immediate campaigning and a recall conference in the autumn. Local committees opposed to the poll tax sprang up in many districts. Leaflets and publicity about the tax provoked a ready response, and a non-registration campaign was started. In many localities, two committees existed: one committed to non-payment and another
The fines for non-registration are crippling in their impact: f50 for initial non-registration; f250 a month thereafter. These
November 28, 1988 • #152 International Viewpoint çainst the olitical upset, the Scottish
19,500 Labour Party majority on. A central issue during the tion of a new taxation system, her's Tory government are nd next year. The campaign ve support, and has brought tent and opposition to d Tory rule.
h political parties has pushed he spotlight once again, with i Scottish Assembly stronger efore.
ORGAN
HE fines may be imposed even if the information has been found elsewhere, and there is no limit to the fines that can eventually be levied. Non- payment of fines can end in prison sentences. But despite all this, 50% of Scottish people had not registered by the set deadline.
The leaders of all the campaigns agreed that non-registration was not the real issue, and all bar a token few were then asked to register, but many continued to refuse. •
The only way left to oppose the tax was a campaign for non-payment. At its party conference, the SNP endorsed non- payment and called for 100,000 Scots to pledge not to pay. Fourteen Labour MPs also said they would not pay their poll tax, including some confirmed Kinnock supporters such as Robin Cook. The Campaign for a Scottish Assembly called for "Committees of 100" to be set up, each containing prominent Scots who had pledged not to pay.
In fact, the penalties for non-payment are less than for non-registration, this being a civil offence and not a breach of criminal law. The only penalty after being taken to court is a 10% surcharge, plus a handling charge and legal fees. This amounts to around t100 on top of a £300 average tax. Around 20% of the population would be better off by paying the fine than they were
The SNP and Labour's left-wing called for a "Can Pay — Won't Pay" campaign for people in this 20% to pledge non-payment. The poorest section of the population cannot pay in any case. It is estimated that if 20,000 people refuse to pay, then this could jam up the legal machinery and force the government to respond.
Widespread discontent with Tory rule
At the Labour Party's recall conference in September this year in Govan, a queer split opened up over what to do. Prior to the conference, the Scottish executive voted by only 16-13 against non-payment. A majority of delegates favoured the mass non-payment campaign, but the Labour leaders called for the ending of the campaign, arguing that they could not break the law. The majority of trade unions, dominated by London-based executives, backed the leadership and defeated the non-payment resolution. The message from the Govan conference was clear: the SNP says "don't pay", Labour says "pay". This was understood by the people of Govan, who voted in the SNP two months later.
However, it would be wrong to portray the SNP as winning the by-election purely because of its stance on the poll tax. There is a much wider frustration over the way the Tories rule Scotland. Thatcher has 20% of Scottish support and only 15% of Scottish MPs, and yet unlimited power over Scotland. Government policy on local government, housing and education are altering what were viewed as distinctly Scottish institutions in ways opposed by Scots. The government has shut down the Scottish Grand Committee, a forum for Scottish law, because there are not sufficient Scottish Tory MPs to serve on it. Foreign and English multinationals make arbitrary decisions without Scottish MPs having any
Unemployment is significantly higher than in most of England. Support for devolution, a Scottish Assembly in Edinburgh, has been a steady 80% or so for several years. Around 30% of the population want complete separation from England, a figure that has almost doubled since 1987.
The Labour Party in Scotland backed devolution in the mid-1970s, and is formally committee to a Scottish Assembly with strong economic powers. But Neil Kinnock is totally opposed to separation, and is perceived as luke-warm on devolution. the June 1987 general election, voters have been looking to Labour's 50 MPs to protect
BRITAIN them from Thatcher. Kinnock and his Scottish backers vigorously opposed extra-parliamentary action. In consequence they have failed, and have been seen to have failed, to in any way hinder the Tories. The MPs became popularly known as the "Feeble Fifty". The result has been an increase in SNP support from 14% at the general election to around 25% now over all of
Many in the Labour Party and STUC гесognize the need for a firmer stance against the Tories in Scotland. They realize that only in this way can they maintain Labour's support. They recognize also that this runs counter to Kinnock's policy for winning English votes, but are willing to accept the consequences of diminished prospects for the Labour majority in London.
Scottish Labour Action, a left nationalist group in the Labour Party, argued for Labour to use its Scottish MPs to set up a Scottish Assembly after the next election even if the Tories win in Britain. They also argue for non-payment of the poll tax and making the Labour Party in Scotland autonomous from London. widely supported by socialists in the LP.
A Constitutional Convention has been established to draft a constitution for a Scottish parliament, and then to set it up. This Convention may also act as an interim parliament. A referendum is likely, although it will be organized independently of the government. All parties, except the Tories, will participate in the Convention. The national question in Scotland is firmly at the centre of the political agenda. It is perceived as being perhaps the only weapon that could be effective against Thatcherism.
Labour's parliamentary cretinism
The whole question of how independence could be achieved, and the sort of policies that could be adopted by an Assembly, are the subject of debate within the LP. Socialists have a major opening to discuss political strategy. The SNP, meanwhile, is campaigning for an independent Scotland within the European Community. A recent poll gives 54% support for this. This formula will structure the debate unless Labour quickly poses an alternative.
Labour has been thrown into turmoil by these events. It can bury its head, call the Govan result a fluke and watch its supporters turn to the SNP. Alternatively, it can embrace a non-payment campaign and other extra-parliamentary action, and commit itself to setting up a Scottish parliament and wresting economic power from the Tories
Labour in Scotland is polarizing around these alternatives. Each of them has major risks: to ignore Govan and the poll tax may doom Labour to permanent opposition and loss of its base; the other course requires open discussion of tactics and a break from 15 parliamentary cretinism. *
International Viewpoint #152 • November 28, 1988
SWEDEN
Right-wing
parties
rebuffed in elections
THE BOURGEOIS parties were rebuffed in the September 18 parliamentary elections, but the social democrats also lost votes. Unexpectedly, the Communist Party topped the 4% threshold and stayed in parliament. The Environment Party broke into parliament, with 20 seats. Overall the bourgeois parties got 152 votes, the social democrats 157, the CP 21. The social democrats lost two seats and the CP gained two.
The following editorial from Internationalen, the paper of the Socialist Party, Swedish section of the Fourth International, assesses these results.
N OVERWHELMING majority A of the Swedish people said a firm no to privatization of the • public services, tax reform in favor of high-income strata and to a state of more unregulated capitalism. The wave of right-wing enthusiasm that started to break in the last election has now ebbed.
Some former right-wing voters undoubtedly contributed to the 50,000 new votes for the Center Party [a liberal bourgeois party but with a more social liberal and "green" profile]. This year it has been Center leader Olaf Johansson who has assumed the role of the wet among the bourgeois politicians.
The social democracy lost nearly 16 in 0,000 voles. It seem that the tendency in the previous election of decreasing support from workers and those on lowincomes was reinforced. Hundreds of thousands of working-class voters expressed their lack of confidence in the social-democratic policy, simply by stayıng home. The 900,000 abstentions - ever fourth voter in many working-class and immigrant neighborhoods — says something about the scope of this discontent.
The Moderates, People's Party and the social democrats — the parties that more any others represent the old alternatives -together lost more than half a million voters. Half of these abstained, and the other half supported parties that put themselves orward as opposing the establishment olicy. The lion's share of the latter wer to the Environment Party, which gained 200,000 votes.
Media campaign against environmentalists
The Environment Party has only a small number of members. The party is not even the backbone of the environmentalist where near the same possibilities to put forward its views as the established parliamentary parties. The week before the election, a full-scale campaign was unleashed in the mass media to discredit its representatives.
Nonetheless, the Environmental Party overcame the obstacles and wrecked the party system that has predominated in Sweden since the war. The reason was that by making some gains in the municipalities in the 1985 elections, the Environmental Party managed to make its way into the public opinion polls and mass media. This small crack in the facade of the old party system, this small glimpse of something new, was sufficient for hundreds of thousands of people to abandon the established parties.
The encouraging thing about this year's election is that many hundreds of thousands of people have not looked to the right wing for something new. The result of the referendum in the town of Sjöbo [where an anti-immigrant proposition won] on the other hand gives a disturbing picture of other forces that are also trying to channel the discontent.