conferences in Brighton and Blackpool for many years past.' In short a quite clear and precise policy convergence is being worked out between the monetarist writers who formed Thatcher's economic policies and the chief strategists of the SDP. The well known description of David Owen as 'Thatcherism with a human face' is not a joke. It is a perfectly acof the economic views of the SDP.
The reason for this growing clarity of the SDP's policies are not hard to find. Nothing could be more naive than the view, put forward in the press and sections of the left, that the SDP is a 'middle class' party, clinging to Keynesian economics. That completely confuses who are the SDPs (very few) activists with who actually finances, runs and controls the party groups being very different in many vasoo The real forces that created the SDP le in the companies who feared during the 1970s that the major problems of the Conservative Party would lead to a situation where Labour was almost permanently in office. Between 1964 and 1979 Labour was in government for 11½ years and the Tories for only 3½. Believing the Conservatives might be too weakened to keep Labour out of office under the present system a whole series of major firms began to campaign in the mid 1970s for a proportional representation and a non-Labour 'alternative to the Tories':
Companies such as GEC responded by donating money to the Liberal Party after the 1974 election. An committee for electoral reform' established to back representation London at the beginning of this October to decide how to back the SDPs 'Campaign for Fair Votes' which is being launched this autumn.
SOCIALIST WORKER The Committee's present members and supporters include Sir Adrian Cadbury of Cadbury Graham Wilkins Richard Cave of Thorn-EMI, Sir Leslie Smith of BOC, John Laing, Sir John Sainsbury of the Sainsbury grocery Broackes of Trafalgar House, and two Tory ex-Cabinet Ministers Lord Carr and Lord Jellicoe.
There is a parallel City committee including Sir Robert Samuel, Mr Ronald Arthus of Prudential, and Roger Gibbs of the National Discount Company.
The chief these industrial figures, and that of their individual companies, quite strongly as regards immediate tactics. Some, such as Schweppes and Beecham's, are strong financial backers of the Conservative Party. Others, such as Thorn-EMI, at electoral industrial was proportional — unis commitce mel mn usual playing the role of saying Schweppes, Sir of Beecham's, Sir Chapple WrOte.
Sir Maurice Laing of group. Nigel Tories in on y June Clark of Hill political orientation of differs Cadbury- calling for a vote of constituencies in June. what others merely think in private, er plained his policy very clearly in an article in the 17 June issue of The Times surveying the outcome of the election.
*If we had not been ,so completely tied to the (Labour) Party's coat tails we could have urged our members to vote SDP, or Liberal if they had a chance of winning. Over and over again our loyalty to Labour let the In other words the orientation that Chapple proposed was an 'alternative' to Thatcher in the shape of a LabourSDP-Liberal bloc. Chapple in fact had already put his words into action by calling for a vote for the SDP candidate issues is attractive. against Labour in Islington North in 'In a more the general election. Roy Grantham of system, APEX was another trade union leader for the Liberals against the Labour Party in a number editorial it prepared for the election concluded its voting appeal as follows: *The policies on which the Alliance has fought the election are not exciting but they are appealing. Its main lines of economic policy we can, with one exception (statutory incomes policy J.R.) largely endorse... It's approach to defence and major foreign policy representative voting the Alliance emerge tomorrow as the main alternative to Mrs Thatcher, which we would count as a strong gain. This is highly unlikely under the present system: but it would do nothing but good if the underlying support which the centre party has claimed were realised in the ballot box tomorrow, if only as a marker for the future and a powerful argument for electoral reform.' Naturally, however, the Econom was not being particularly brilliant anticipating the orientation of Cha ple, Laird and the SDP After all t Economist, like the EETPU and AUB right wing, simply jumps to the tu demanded by the forces that creat and financed the Tories, the SDP, a the campaign for 'fair votes(!) in t first place ICI, Thorn-EMI and ICL turn t handle of the barrel organ, Economist and Financial Times pl out the notes, and Frank Chapple is t monkey who jumps around on top collect the money.
As for dismantling the Labour P. ty under its present constitution' the is no doubt what that means. It mea breaking the links between the tra unions and the Labour Party. once more, is the line of both Fra Chapple and the Thatcher governme only the means differ.
The way the Thatcher governme is trying to weaken the links betwe the trade unions and the Labour Par is by seeking to smash the unions. F Chapple, in his post election it means arguing that Bo wings of the movement (trade unio and labour should be more indepe dent of each other.
For the TUC leadership under Mu ray it meant at this year's Trade Unic
----- pull-quotes -----
Or abour g?