not at the performance ministers, not at the internal struggle within the Labour Party, but at the changes that are taking place in the world and how socialists should respond.
We wanted a broadly based conference with as many constituencies as possible, with the Campaign groups, with union involveWe also Labour Party conference so that it didn't get diverted into tactical discussions about how to handle that conference. ference 1S about Labour Party matters.
In addition to opening and closing plenaries, and a large number of workshops, there will be three mini-conferences within the conference.
The first will be on peace and non-alignment and the direction of American policy in the Gulf and Central America. The domestic imcoordinating wanted it after also the same Indeed the coninternal Then, voices of despair began.
Jay said we abandon Clause 4. people in the Labour Party the same responses as after 1959. I mention this because, in some re- the spects, I played the part in 1959 of the campaign.
I ran the television, everybody said it was the best campaign we had ever had, and at the end of it we full were defeated! The response was — it was said that we had been defeated, but that the leadership had been established.
almost immediately, the Douglas should change the name of the Labour Party to the Democratic Party. The editor of the New Statesman, a man called Johnson, said nationalisation was an albatross which should be drop ped. Hugh Gaitskell said we should I am not saying that there are but having lived™ exact. parallels, through that period I do know that very strong parallels exist and that lessons relevant. that does not however, is that Harold Macmillan was well to the left of 1987 Labour Party policy in his commitment to employment, welfare detente.
Socialism The only way to deal with this situation is to have an absolutely open discussion about socialism. The response isn't to do what the Independent Labor Party (ILP) did in the 1930s when it got disgusted and left the party, or what Stafford Cripps did with his Popular Front, or what the Bevanites did with their parliamentary fraction - just being difficult within the House of Commons with few, or no roots outside parliament or in the trade unions. the heart of the matter so as to win exist, the support of the majority in the Labour Party and trade unions — and in so doing to educate a lot of other people fed up with the SDP, fed up with the Liberals, and fed up with the Tories.
making word 'forum' would have been better, because after a forum nothing happens except another one.
Coalition be discussed at Labour Party conferer tion Pd inevitably be followed coalition.
We must attempt to go to policies. never note in history.
Weare not proposing a decision Perhaps the that they plan succeeding, On one question that is going to proportional representahave always opposed it. PR followed by And coalition does whole number of things. First it is aimed to prevent the election of a Labour government with radical With PR there would have been a Labour government - including the government of 1945. Proportional representation must be the shortest suicide Future Second it denies the electorate a chance of influencing the future. You vote for the candidates and the party of your choice but then, since none of these parties are capable of the real policy which you are governed is decide after the election. PR means thai there is zero vote for any polies - because nobody knowi what the policy is. until after the
ortional 1980 Tanks 1987 1980 Combat aircraft 1987 1980 77, 40 Combat helicopters 1987 1980 Artillery 1987 Source: The Economist estimates 2,700 #ANTANAAAA 332 F=1,000 *x1,000, 4,000+ Socialist Action 25 Sept 1987 _ 1,740 •*********** 445 53, 500 * Serviceable