Labour's rightward various social movements already struggling against Structural Adjustment Programmes, against IMF/WB control over the economy, against the usurious foreign debt system, and in defence of health, housing, education, work, salary and job security, human and social rights, democracy and political rights.
It is time for a new look at the relationship between market and democracy, and a redefinition of the role of the state, in response to the opening of the national economy to global pressures. The various sectors of the left each have their own demands.
What we need to do now is bring these demands together, in a real debate about growth, the different models of development, the context of capitalist globalisation, and the various alternative" social projects. Many of these projects imply some level of relative "deconnection" from the global economy-asserting national and regional autonomy, in order to meet local needs, rather than simply follow the agenda of global capital. * This article is also available in French and Spanish
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR
RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
• 48 bed conference centre with six channel interpretation system, library and television room, ten minutes from the centre of Amsterdam and 2 minutes from a park
• Contact Robert Went or Peter Drucker to discuss holding your event at the IRE tel. (+31) 20/671 7263 fax 673 2106
PO Box 53290, 1007 RG Amsterdam
Netherlands. e-mail <iire @antenna.ni> 16 International Viewpoint #316 November 1999 slide
After 30 months in power, Tony Blair and his right-wing New Labour government are stronger than ever. The opposition Conservatives are seriously divided over the European Union. Alan Thornett looks at the recent conferences of Labour, the Conservatives, and the Trade Union Congress. The September 1999 TUC conference was the most right-wing of modern times. It marked a new stage in the domination of New Labour over the unions. Not just because union leaders support what New Labour is doing, but because of the wav they have embraced "social partnership"
-the most dangerous form of class collaboration to be inflicted on the British trade union movement since the break with Liberalism at the beginning of the century. Social partnership commits the unions to support for the requirements of the employers without any of the elements of compromise evident in such schemes in the past.
In his speech to the trade union conference, Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair downplayed his long-term ambition of breaking the historic link between the unions and the Labour Party (Blair sees this as essential if Labour is to become the principal party of British capitalism. But, for the moment, he reassured unionists "You are now welcome back into number 10 Downing Street" (the Prime Minister's residence), But it will "not be beer and sandwiches," (famously served at meetings between Labour Prime Ministers and TUC leaders in the 1970s), he warned. "Just tea"
New Labour has not just distanced itself from the unions. It has built a completely new relationship with the employers. For Blair, New Labour's relationship with the employers is infinitely more important than its relationship with the unions. Blair has always considered the trade unions an obstacle to his plans and ambitions.
This new relationship marks a big defeat for any kind of militant, class based, trade unionism and a victory for the Blairite project. We in new Labour have our 'third way, and you in the unions have your 'third way, Blair said. He was talking of the TUC's commitment to partnership with the employers. TUC General Secretary John Monks told the conference that "the days of 'them-and-us' and industrial confrontation are over"
The most extreme proposals for social partnership came from (Sir) Ken Jackson of the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union (a major TUC union). Jackson argued that the TUC should disband its own annual conference in favour of a biannual conference organised jointly with the employers organisation, the Confederation of British Industry!
Not a single heavyweight union leader used the TUC conference, to
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
{MOODOO! M00000!
speak out against social partnership. Most of them are already busily negotiating partnership agreements, often involving no-strike deals, and clauses tying the unions to the interests of the employers.
Many employers are looking to such deals to offset the possibility of extended union recognition under Blair's new Employment Relations Act, which regulates union recognition ballots in workplaces. If they are going to have to recognise unions more often, they would rather do so under a partnership deal and with the union most committed to social partnership Recent examples of this kind of "sweetheart' deal include Unilever, Barclay's Bank, Tesco, Littlewoods and the Legal and General Building Society.
Social Partnership was not the only right-wing theme at this conference. When it came to the European Union and the single currency (EMU) the conference was well to the right of New Labour. The conference rejected the New Labour line of "wait until the conditions are right" and voted to enter EMU as fast as possible. Those major unions more-or-less opposed to EMU mounted no serious opposition, and allowed the new policy to be adopted! Britain's biggest union UNISON had a clear policy against EMU. But their delegation abstained in the vote. This gave the pro-EMU unions a majority of votes.
Other major unions like the Transport and general Workers Union (TGWU) suddenly accepted current New Labour policy. General Secretary Bill Morris reinterpreted TGWU's opposition to EMU as meaning "we should not go in until the economic conditions are right" back EMU in order to pursue their vision of the European social model. Yet the European social model evaporating even as they clamour to join it. They may not of noticed, but the Thatcherite agenda of deregulation and privatisation is being enforced across Europe by Social democratic parties, who are in government in 13 of the 15 EU countries. By the time Britain enters EMU, what will remain of the elusive
European social model?
The main resistance to the rightwing agenda emerged in a debate on the relationship between new Labour and the unions. Ken Cameron, left-wing leader of the Fire Brigades Union, caused consternation when he proposed that the unions take the lead in breaking the link with New Labour! He argued that since "the Labour Party no longer sees us as their natural allies, we can no longer rely on them to be our natural allies". The trade unions, he said, contribute f6m (US$9.5m) a year to Labour Party funds-over 30% of the party's total income. "Why should we keep on signing cheques to a party which no longer represents us?" Cameron asked. "Why don't we give it to organisations and candidates who promote our interests?"
The general disaffiliation of unions from the Labour Party would be mistake. But this issue wont go away. The FBU is not the only union which is looking at ways of giving some money organisations candidates which support the aims of the union. But massive disaffiliation would only make sense if it was linked to the development of a political alternative to Blairism. Soft left
The conference also underlined the serious crisis of the soft left. This was shown in their capitulation on the question of social partnership, in their collapse before the John Monks line on EMÚ and in their refusal to challenge the employers at almost any level.
Their inability to develop independent perspective is personified in the decision of Rodney Bickerstaff (54) to retire as General Secretary of UNISON, the country's biggest union. In the past leaders like Bickerstaff would have clung determinedly to such positions. But the continuing historic low level of strike struggles and the domination of Blairism in the Labour Party and the unions have dramatically reduced the role that leaders like Bickerstaff can play. They have no intention of challenging Blairism, and there are no militant struggles for them
The hard left also has its difficulties in the unions. Most have not grasped the need for a conscious struggle against social partnership. Most of the organisations in the individual unions are weaker than a year or two ago. There is an urgent need for a cross-union left which can seek to coordinate a fight-back as well conducting a political struggle against social partnership.
Hard Labour
The TUC conference was bad for the left. But there was worse to come at the Labour Party conference itself.
Blair could hardly have been more dominant and the left (there is still a left it is much weakened) more invisible.
New Labour strategists have clearly already concluded that they are going to win the next election in two years time-and barring major developments such as severe economic crisis they are probably right. Blair therefore concentrated on developing the next stage of his project. The class war, he proclaimed, was over. Instead, he was going to declare war on o "the conservatives of the right and of the left" who are standing in the way of New Labour "modernisation"
Ever since he abolished Clause 4 of the Labour Party constitution (which called for the nationalisation of the means of production), Blair has been trying to heal the spilt between labourism and liberalism at the turn of the century. He has now gone even further, and called for the pro-EU, "one nation" section of the Conservative Party to leave their hard-right comrades and join New Labour! Blair specifically mentioned Former Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer Kenneth Clarke and former Tory Deputy Prime Minister
Since then Blair has formed a new, unprecedented, campaigning alliance with Clarke and Heseltine (and the leader of the Liberal Democrats) in favour of the EU and in favour of entry into EMU "when the time is right"which in reality means as soon as they think they can win a referendum on it.
The formation of this alliance has severely exacerbated the deep divide on EU questions inside the Conservative Party. In fact, the October party conference confirmed that the Tories' are verging on the edge of a formal
Conference debates showed that the Party has moved sharply to the right. Xenophobia ruled the day-the main themes were defending fox hunting (which Blair wants to ban), defending the pound (against EMU membership), and, when Margaret Thatcher took the floor, defending the Chilean dictator Pinochet against extradition!
The Tories are being torn apart by a combination of the success of Blairism in winning the middle ground of English (though not Scottish) politics, and the Conservatives own long standing divisions over Europe. One- nation Tories no longer find the Tory
Party habitable and feel much closer to
Blair and New Labour. In fact what
Blair says today about the EU is what the one-nation Tories have been saying
Shortly after the conference season,' Blair carried out an audacious government reshuffle. Nothing shows
International Viewpoint #316 November 1999 17
* Britain Blair's personal authority more than the decision to bring Peter Mandelson back after only 10 months out of the government (following a financial scandal). At the same time Blair expelled most of the surviving remnants of old Labour in the government team, and established a team modelled almost entirely in his own image. He feels no need to compromise with anyone in the Labour leadership. There have only been the most muted protests at his actions from within the party. Most of
Labour Party into the first party of the British bourgeoisie, replacing the Conservatives. His second objective is to ensure that, when the long downturn in the level of strike struggles ends, any new radicalisation will not easily find expression inside the Party.
There is still a fight to be had inside the Labour Party. But the main elements of a fight-back are likely to come from unions si and/or the social An upturn in social struggle might lead to a regeneration of the left in the Labour Party. But the Party is not where the struggle will start. This means that the priorities should be strengthening the left in the strengthening the intervention of the left in the campaigns and the social movements.*