ONE OF the chief features of the run up to the Labour Party conference, and during the conference itself, was the developing crisis in the Labour Coordinating Committee (LCC) and Tribune. This was signalled on the eve of conference itself by a front page article by Tribune editor Nigel Williamson entitled Whatever happened realignment. This admitted The Soft Left has become probably the least coherent grouping in Williamson argued 8T191 democratic policies were adopted by the Labour Party but that: "the realigned left Teels powerless to do anything about the situation." He quoted approvingly Peter Hain of the LCC that drift and even inertia' had set in. Williamson said realignment had been a spectacular failure' within the party.
At the party conference itself these divisions sharpened further. Tribune rally on the Wednesday night David Blunkett for the first openly, if guardedly, attacked Kinnock by name saying: I believe, and I've never said this before on a public platform, I believe Neil Kinnock is now relying more on the centre and the right than those who were previously his colleagues, friends, and comrades on the left.' Blunkett attacked in particular, and in very strong terms, Kinnock's decision to run against Dennis Skinner for vice chair of the party - thereby breaking with all party precedent.
The most spectacular intervention at the Tribune rally came from Ken Livingstone. Tribune editor Nigel Williamson had attempted to turn the meeting into an anti-Campaign Group rally -starting the supposedly Tribune rally with remarks attacking the Campaign Group for meeting two miles outside Blackpool!
Livingstone however rebuffed that, called for unity between the Tribune and Campaign groups, and outlined a proposed basis for this in support for the demand for US bases out of Britain, winning the demands of Black Sections, and support for WAC.
Most significantly however Livingstone launched an open and brutal attack on the witch hunt. He stated:
Those who have read what I have written in Tribune must know quite clearly I do not support the Militant tendency. I've been subject to much abuse from Militant tendency. But I never wanted them expelled from the party. I organised in the London labour movement until we won our positions on women, black people and the need for a free and united Ireland. That is how we go forward.
There can be no support for the witch hunt. Those who warned at the beginning that the witch hunt would actually widen have been proved right.
We had no doubt whatsoever that Militant would be expelled at this conference. The votes for it were there. People hoped that they would be able to draw the line at that and prevent the expulsion of Khan and Scally. We failed on that. Does anyone doubt that having failed there that we still face the danger of a continuing wave of expulsions in that minority of right wing controlled constituency Labour parties?
"There can be no support for left unity, there can be no step forward to create agreement about the sort of policies we want, unless we agree first of all that we resolve our differences internally and we oppose every expulsion that comes before the NEC. We have to campaign up and down the length and breadth of the party on that.' David Blunkett however justified the Liverpool expulsions from the platform of the Tribune rally.
Livingstone's speech was, among other reasons, almost certainly a result from Labour Left Liaison (LLL) Livingstone had called earlier in the week for unity between the LCC and LLL. At a press conference the LLL's chair Ann. Pettifor, and Tony Benn from the Campaign Group of MPs, had explained that the LLL was totally for party democracy and against the witch hunt, despite its complete disagreement with the politics of Militant, and that rejection attacks democracy represented by the witch hunt was a precondition discussing any participation of the ICC in the LLL.
As Livingstone was in any case opposed to the expulsions, he directly referred to the LLEs position in his speech, and almost certainly LLL preslopments in the Provoked pressure the 'social A parallel fight broke out in Labour being Activist - the daily bulletin produced y the LCC at party conference. This almost started off on Monday with a fron page justifying the witch hunt, calling for expulsions, and saying asked for what they have got. Inside however was an article by Livingstone entitled Beyond the which declared: 'there is a greater common ground between ICC and LLL Al ine than could have been imagined six months ago... We must not allow sectarianism to prevent us seizing the potential which is opening before us."
by rnaay or conrerence nowever 'sectarianism' with Labour Activist declaring that the chief task of the next year was to consolidate and continue the shift in the composition of the NEC started by the removal of Eric Heffer.
These are in fact completely incompatible orientations for the ICC and reflect the basic strategic choice facing it. It is the weakest major current in the CLPs and has no chance whatever to dominate the situation itself. It has to ally either with the Campaign Group left against the right - which is in affect what Livingstone is proposing, or with the right wing against the Cam. socialist paign Group - which is what Clause 4 and the right wing of the LCC who dominate Blunkett looks like he is wanting to directly begin to unite with the Campaign Group against the right wing but is not prepared to accept the policies which are the only basis on which that can be achieved.
This entire pot was then stirred further by an article by Martin Linton in the Guardian on Saturday after conference which accurately spelt out the choices facing the LCC and called for the LCC to reject Livingstone's line.
What is happening is clear. The fact that the Campaign Group did not bring out into the open sharply enough that while it defended party democracy against witch hunts it did not agree with the politics of Militant allowed it to be smeared by the press and party leadership. Simultaneously the lunatic ultraleft line of currents such as Labour Beri. This made a that he 10 chan the to avoid all the key contradictions it faced.
But in the run in to part conference that began to change sharply. Tony Benn and Dennis Skinner's politics began to dominate much more clearly in the Campaign Group -defence of the miners, opposition to Labour's trade union proposals, and fighting the witch hunt, with strong support for Black demands of British withdrawal from Ireland, and opposition to US bases and NATO.
Simultaneously the creation of the LIL marginalised the Labour Briefing. The result is a closing down of the room for manouevre of the strayed into LCC's camp because of the economism and workerism of Militant and the Morning Star, are rapidly finding the situation clarified - because a Skinner/Benn dominated Campaign group, linked with the LLL, involves a much stronger defence of women and black people than anything the LCC is coming up with.
At present with the LCC the witch hunters of Clause 4 remain firmly committed to their bloc with the right wing against the Campaign group and LLL.
Livingstone is clearly trying to reorientate the LCC to a bloc with the Campaign Group and LLL against the right wing. wno will win remains to be seen.
But the lack of political coherence of the 'soft left' is now fully coming out into the open.
IOT even the next election' was in full swing again WITHIN OUR movement there i