AFTER KEN Livingstone, Peter Hain is the best known member of the 'left' wing of the LCC. Last Sunday, in News on Sunday, he wrote an unequivocable article attacking any pact between Labour and the Liberals: 'The...suggestion of a Lib-Lab pact should be rejected outright..lt won't happen... Nor is it desirable.' Excellent. But then a few questions arise. Why is the LCC, and the soft left, de facto in a bloc with the right wing which contains those who are in favour of a deal with the Liberals? And why is it in a bloc with the right wing when that opposes the demands of women and black peo ple in the party which the LCC claimed to stand for? And what does Peter Hain, and others who think like him in the LCC or elsewhere, think about the refusal of the Tribune Group to conclude an agreement with the Campaign Group for a joint slate for the shadow cabinet? Do they agree with that decision, like the New Statesman, or disagree with it like Tribune?
This is not about 'exposing anybody. It is about extremely practical questions. The Labour Party today is being run as a bloc between the soft left and the hard right. But the right is going down a road which large sections of the soft lefi totally disagree with.
Shouldn't they be thinking about breaking off their bloc with the right and forming one with the left instead?
fathers cady Labour conferences to elec- leadership under by emintensely OWIl undemocratic attitude to this issue.
"The scope for the two oppositions working rogerner Is severely nutca behe deift to thiamentale Labour Party. But on some of socialism then issues there should surely be an effort to make common altogether. cause across the party barriers • and why not with the disaffected Tory "wets"
as wthe Campaign The for Scottish Assembly, has doggedly tried to keep Scottish self-government as an all-party issue, should not delay in re-attempting early to convene discussion renresentations from al the political parties.' the memorandum as the Tories setting out his proposal for ponent. the merger of the SDP and Liberals Steel made orientation equally clear. explicit in lalking or me ciecuon call wile Wal paign he stated: I would Thatcher non-socialist alternative' David Marquand, part of the proFirst off the mark to make demands on the soft left were the pro-coalitionist right. The New Statesman, which now acts as the weekly organiser of the Labour right, heralded the outcome of the election by explicitly comme our In ravour ora coalition government and a deal with the Liberals. It accompanied this with an article by its political editor, reler neunel, praising une Tribune group of MPs for refusing to draw up any joint slate for the shadow cabinet with the Campaign Group.
The New Statesman's political editor, John Lloyd, 1vcl out lic alaryss n Monda column' the Financial Times on 6 July. He started from the situa• 039 • He linked this directly to the situation in the Labour Party and the differences over tions: 'Dr Owen is concernOUti ideologically distinct position for himself (and it may serged Liberal Democratic soon himself). Alliance without him will be more amenable to deals will we Labour rarty. Ivc one will talk about this with year when the Alliance will - it is assumed have sorted itself out. If talkins does start, the principal dif ferences may be found to be few.
"That will be partly because the Labour Party seems to be in the throes of 'Politics after the election' 150 PEOPLE attended tion' conference on 4 July. At the main morning session Les Huckfield MEP, Linda Bellos — leader of Lambeth Council Ken Livingstone MP Ann Pettifor tional organiser of the Labour Women's Action Committee John Ross discussed the way forward after the election.
Discussion centred THE IMMEDIATE outcome of the general election has posed more concretely than ever before the choices facing the 'soft left'. Within three weeks of the election many of the basic strategic choices that will dominate politics in this parliament were posed in miniature.
a realignment of its own: between the soft left and the right. The Tribune shadow cabinet slate contains Mr Bryan Gould (whose huge political and presentational talents include the ability to travel ideologially light); Mr JONI Prescoll (a former union official, who found HISCHI studio debate supporting the proposition that Labour should be state funded to break its dependence on the unions) and Mr Jack Straw (blooded in endless battles with LOHCOI borough leaders of the left) ... The varts no longer doome ing stars whose politics are fundamentally different those of Mr John Cunningham, Mr Roy Hattersley or Mr John Smith.
Turning to the Alliance clova noted 'on Labour's side, there is a nice and delavable calculation to be made, as to whether it can hope the Alliance down by convincingly re-occupying the centre-left ground — or if it cannot, whether make some sort of deal...
Won Lloyd then outlined his perspective: "The safest bet this: Liberal Democratic Alliance will emerge; with left-of-centre leaning; that the leadership will continue the process of signalling to the electorate that it is now a modern, social democratictype party with lots of ideas about wealth creation as well as a concern for those at the bottom of the heap; on the drive to open up on coalition with the Liberals by the the Labour Party's constitution, OMOV. to drive through political shift right and should be expanding its appeal.
The afternoon sions heard Ernest Mandel speaking UNLISOL development of the 'dual society' In KuroDe in the USSR.
Jean McKnight trom to sit back in satistact rals and SDP tea: should move decisively.
that these two groups will gently incline towards each other ain an of listening-to-what-you-say It is the result of this possible mutual inclination towards each • OLIC Labour and Alliance which will determine whether not the mould is really to be Sinn Fein spoke on Ireland after the election, %i0 01n Harrison on economic policies. broken ... the pursuit of Pooler may zoower not leave But while appearing to hedge his bets Lloyd staked out his ground on the funDiguinta it is becoming.
biguity: clear that there is a broad identity of political view stretching from the jagged fissure between the Campaign and Tribune groups of the Labour Party, to the equally jagged fissure in the The Labour right of course rushed to openly distance itset trom coalitionist consequences of Lloyd's position Roy Hattersley doing so public ly on television and Bryan Gould attacking it at the LCC last weekend. But then, at present, they have no choice but to be extremely careful over this issue otherwise the OCLWCCI une soli left and the right wing will break down and Kinnock's whole project in the Labour Party will be undermined Success As The Times noted on 7 July: "To keep the soft left in line, Kinnock will need to re-emphasise his commitment non-nuclear defence policy . And he will, of course, have to deny that he has any interest in a Lib-Lab pact, just as David Steel will have to disclaim such a pact while forcing through the merger. The likes of Eric David Owen will have a joint interest in trying to bring the subject up, alleging a betrayal of SOCAISLO centrist principles respectively.
However as the article continued the Labour right, and Kinnock, in any case can delay their decision over try Labour majority at the next election or go for a deal with the Liberals. It urgec 'Neil Kinnock would need to push through rule changes within the Labour Party — one member one vote in candidate selection, perhaps also new disciplinary rule alice st a heel, and themated to roto- bringing the hard left ing back its recent advance 'Neil Kinnock doubtless never intended to Decome mic cool ede who surrendered for ever Phone majority government. The temptation to keep his options open will doubtless remain strong right down to the wire, especially since his reform package is equally pact or a final attempt by LaDOul li displace the likes or Sharon Kinnock will want to Atkin marginals whether it is in order to improve Labour's image nationally or to entice Liberals to vote Labour locally.
Majority
This recessit of the ight and Kinnock to stout ly deny any suggestion on the topic of a deal with the last Sunday's News on Sunday outlined the Labour Coor- Here rele Hain dinating Committee (LCC's) view - which was indistinguishable from Kinpact. R. H possibilities for realignment nock's. However Hain stated clearly: gestion of a Lib-Lab pac should be rejected outright would be the Liberals. The main beneficiary Such views are imporfant because, as The Times pointed out, _carry through his changes in the Labour Party: Kinnock will need to win and hold the support phe union bosses groups (especially Ron Todd of th transport workers), and the soft left within the parliamentary There is no prospect of the hard left achieving outright victory, but if enough of the soft lett were to delect lo them (in the shadow cabinet elections, tor example they could block Kinnock's drive tor reform.
Figures such as Hain therefore have to be kept in line, even by the right, until the piness crushing left carried through. Then a turn can be - anc those like Hain can be given the choice of going along with it or being tossed aside like the proverbial squeezed lemon.
Process The delicacy of the operation tor the Labou right and Kinnock is that while the SOll went prepared to go along with all the demands placed on them during the last parlia ment, inveighling them on the Liberals is quite a difterent matter. rurthermore even if the goal of coalition announced LIC demands that will be placed on the soft left as the right wing moves in that direcSocialist Action 10 July 1987* TO POWER tion are going to grow and grow.
What is inevitably goin to result is a process of dif terentiation This already started at the LCC annual last autumn when divided over whether to work with Labour Left Liaison or not. The same choice has now spread into the Parliamentary Labour Party with th Tribune group voting 37-27 against a joint slate with th callac els willi the New Statesman supporting the 37 and Tribune itself • the The same divisions are going to appear in the trade unions.
A majority of the soft left, , particular leadership, will undoubted ly go over to the right. But a minority will go over to the left.
Lead These divisions will inevitably deepen because the soft left's political project is incoherent. On the hand it genuinely wants to avoid a coalition with the Liberals, with all that would entail. hand it rejects the , only alliance, that with the left in the party, that would build an alternative Inevitably one section of the soft left will maintain its refusal of unity with the hard left', and therefore finish up b going over to support coal tion, and the other, because policies that the coalitionist perspective entails will finish up by allying with the campaign left The task the left of the party faces is to continually pose the 'sott lett' with that choice.
Socialist Action 10 July 1987
----- pull-quotes -----
Socialist Action's •Politics after the elec-
They posed without ambiguity the basic, and sole, strategic choices facing the 'soft left' majority of the
ALLIANCE SHAMBLES SHOULD OPEN THE DOOR TO KINNOCK By PETER HAIN TEMPTING though it may be
IN LLOWN B
within the party... Unions
The Liberal Party, having swallowed the SDP, would be in a powerful position to attract Labour into a more formidable