15conferencespecialfinal-correction.qxp … · 2020-02-27 · practising an entirely new style of...

FREE TO WOMEN’S, CLP, SOC SOC AND TU CONFERENCE DELEGATES

CORBYN

ISSN

- 0968 7866 ISSUE

www.chartist.org.uk

Battles ahead by:Katy Clark Scotland Patricia d’Ardenne Gender Kate HudsonDefence Lynne Jones Membership Gaye Johnston Partydemocracy Frances O’Grady TU rights Ann Pettifor Anti-austerity Cat Smith MP Machine politics Mary Southcott Votes

For democratic socialism *Special Issue - Labour Party Conference 2015* £1

15�Conference�Special�Final�-�correction.qxp_01�cover��04/10/2015��21:56��Page�1

Labour Conference Special 2015 CHARTIST 3

3 EDITORIALA new era

16 WESTMINSTER VIEWCat Smith MP on machinepolitics

FEATURES

REGULARS

4 JEREMY SAYSChartist helps put the record straight on policystatements and the key electoral tests

5 TORY ATTACKS ON WOMENPatricia d’Ardenne explores how womencan help Labour win

6 TU HOPES WITH CORBYNTUC general secretary Frances O’Gradylooks forward to working with Labour’snew leader

7 SCOTTISH ELECTIONSKaty Clark warns of risks of expecting anelectoral turnround in May 2016

8 ECONOMIC ALTERNATIVES ABOUNDAnn Pettifor offers guidance to JohnMcDonnell on how to win the economicdebate

10 LABOUR LOYALTIESSerial rebel Lynne Jones explains whyLabour values are the true test andmembers are flocking back

11 CONFERENCE RULESGaye Johnston unpicks the details of rulechanges to enhance party democracy

12 SOUTHERN DISCOMFORTElectoral reformer Mary Southcottexamines the harsh realities of winningvotes in the South of England

13 SHORTAGE OF HOMESDuncan Bowie sets out how to pay formore

14 TRIDENT RETHINKKate Hudson makes the case

CONTENTS

Cover by Adrian Tealwww.adrianteal.com

Martin Rowson is on holiday

Editorial PolicyCHARTIST promotes debate amongstpeople active in radical politics aboutthe contemporary relevance of demo-cratic socialism across the whole realmof social life.

Editorial BoardCHARTIST is published six t imes ayear by the Chartist Collective.

For details about policy and the EB:

http://www.chartist.org.uk/about-chartist/

Editor: Mike Davis Production: Peter Kenyon

Signed articles do not necessarily represent theviews of the EB

Published by Chartist PublicationsPO Box 52751 London EC2P 2XF tel: 0845 456 4977

Printed by People For Print Ltd, Unit 10, RiversidePark, Sheaf Gardens, Sheffield S2 4BBTel 0114 272 0915. Email: [email protected]

Website: www.chartist.org.ukEmail: [email protected]: @Chartist48Newsletter online: to join, email [email protected]

A mammoth task - page 8

EDITORIALCOVER

Labour Party Conference Special Sept 2015

Something to look forward to - page 6

Focussed on the politics - page 10

A new era: From backbench to frontline

Jeremy Corbyn’s extraordinary journey from demo-cratic socialist outrider to Labour leader is remark-able. Corbyn certainly has the longest record and cvof campaigns and rebellion of any post-war Labourleader. His triumph is testimony to both the new

mood for change in Britain and for an end of old style poli-tics of focus groups, triangulation and political spin.

He has brought a refreshing honesty, conviction andhumanity to politics allied to a radical left programme. Hisvictory was hard fought. From narrowly getting on the bal-lot, to a campaign that gathered momentum from AndyBurnham’s spurning of trade union support to the fatefulabstention of the other three candidates on the Tories harshWelfare Bill, Corbyn became unstoppable. The climax of hisvictory in the first round with almost 60% of votes, 85% ofregistered supporters, almost the same with affiliated sup-porters and a hair-breadth off 50% of members has shakenboth Labour’s old guard and the wider political establish-ment. Andy Burnham came a distant second on 19%, YvetteCooper 17% while Liz Kendall’s 4.% is an epitaph toBlairism.

Labour party membership was up over 50%to 300,000 plus, with another 60,000 joiningin the week following his victory.Registered and affiliated supportersbrought the figure to over 600,000. Over400,000 people voted in the contest,with Corbyn securing 251,417. Mostimportant Team Corbyn grew from afew hundred to 16,000 on the close ofpoll. It is vital that team remainsalive and supporters become activemembers. This is one of the biggestchallenges and opportunities for ournew leadership team. Cat Smith MPoutlines some of the ways the movementcan be developed.

Tom Watson handsomely secured thedeputy leadership, with his fearless campaignagainst the Murdoch empire. His trade union expe-rience should bring weight and grit to the front bench of theopposition.

In a whirlwind of changes Corbyn has put together adiverse shadow cabinet with a majority of women, outstrip-ping the Blair/Brown and Cameron cabinets. Althoughmany New Labourites refused to serve, Andy Burnhamsagely accepted the Home Office portfolio. It is vital that acommon base line is hammered out for the Shadow Cabinetto project a unified message.

An effective media rebuttal team will be vital. NeilColeman looks to be a new but different Alistair Campbellfigure. Team Corbyn worked well through social media.That must continue but the power of the print and broad-cast media is not to be underestimated.

The tasks facing Team Corbyn are manifold, from helpingto breathe democracy into the over-centralised Labour Partyorganisation as Gaye Johnston explains, to refining andpractising an entirely new style of doing politics, and pro-jecting an alternative to Tory austerity, cuts and privatiza-tion, as argued by Ann Pettifor, assaults on democraticand human rights and imperial adventurism.

Labour’s leadership may become more collegiate, inclu-

sive and representative of British society while the practiceof the party needs to tame the machine and embrace themovement. A movement to defeat the Tories may not bebuilt in one parliament alone nor by simply knocking ondoors during elections. The fire and enthusiasm generatedby the Corbyn campaign needs to be sustained into allianceswith a myriad of solidarity movements.

The economy will be the major test for Corbyn and JohnMcDonnell as Shadow Chancellor. Progressive taxation:stamping down on corporate tax evaders, investment ininfrastructure and manufacturing, a green investmentbank, socialising rail and energy are the opening salvos ofan alternative to public spending cuts and austerity.Drawing from a huge reservoir of socialist and Keynesianeconomists it is possible to assemble a team of sympatheticexperts to strengthen the economic alternative.

Europe will be one of the immediate test cases for theCorbyn-led party. The Tories are deeply divided with UKIPsnapping at their heels. Corbyn has emphasised Labourcommitment to the European Union and an intent to

counter Tory efforts to further erode social andworkers’ rights, free movement of people and

democracy. With intelligent political footworkLabour could inflict serious damage on

Cameron and further expose Tory divi-sions. Two urgent challenges are Syriaand refugees. Corbyn is clear on opposi-tion to bombing and non-UN sanc-tioned military intervention. Labour ison firm ground in opposing the shame-ful, heartless policy on refugees.European nations must accept an equi-table share of those fleeing war, repres-

sion and poverty. The biggest threats inEurope are the rise of nationalism and

xenophobia. In the era of globalisationthe European Union is a necessary frame-

work to work with our fellow citizens for pro-gressive economic and social policies. Neo-liber-

als will not always be at the helm.Chartist welcomes the Corbyn-led Party. For us, and

many other campaigners on the Left it represents a hugeleap forward for democratic socialists. We have a real social-ist alternative to fight for now. The keys to No. 10 are aslikely to be won by Corbyn as any of the other candidates.But with Corbyn we will be fighting for Labour values ofequality, redistribution of wealth, democracy, peace andsocial justice; the founding principles of the Labour Partyrecast in the 21st century. Patricia d’Ardenne (women),Mary Southcott (the South), Lynne Jones (Labour val-ues) and Katy Clark (Scotland) look at some key chal-lenges.

Debate and research on why Labour lost should continue.Internal democracy must prevail. But a new alternative istaking shape on the foundations of a modernised democraticsocialism. There are areas of policy and programme thatneed work: the nature and relation of the modern state withsociety, the balance of public and private. But the founda-tion principle of people before profit is being rehabilitated.Corbyn starts with a huge mandate. The wave of enthusi-asm that swept him into the leadership should be a wavethe whole Labour and progressive movement learns to ride.

The fire and enthusiasm

generated by the Corbyncampaign needs to besustained into alliances

with a myriad of solidarity movements

To subscribe to Chartist go to: http://www.chartist.org.uk/subscribe/


4 CHARTIST Labour Conference Special 2015 Labour Conference Special 2015 CHARTIST 5

The UK risks a wideninggender inequalitybecause of Tory austeri-ty policies that affectwomen and those they

care for disproportionately anddeleteriously. The coalition ofcharities - a Fair Deal for Women- has reported that cuts to socialservices, public sector servicesand legal aid will downgrade therole of women in every walk oflife. The benefits cap will bereduced to £23,000 per annum.Sure Start continues to be cut.Young people's housing benefitbetween 18 and 21 will be cut,forcing many into homelessness.

Austerity is sexist becausemost carers and most public sec-tor workers are women. In 90%of families, the primary carer isstill a woman. And again it willbe women who take the emotion-al, financial and social strain thatausterity imposes. By contrast,the five year tax lock will benefitmen who currently earn 19%more than their female counter-parts. Therefore it is women - thelower earners - who will carry thegreater burden of paying off thedeficit.

Corbyn has already recognisedand valued women's caring (andoften unremunerated) work,which is why so many youngwomen have joined the Corbyncampaign, and enthused about aParty that could be more colle-giate and more inclusive. Sixtytwo per cent of women put him astheir first choice, against 48% ofmen, (YouGov survey). Corbyn'santi-austerity, anti-war, pro-wel-fare, pro-labour rights, pro-envi-ronment programme resonateswith so many local campaigns,headed by women, to save hospi-tals, libraries, keep benefitsrights, fight zero hour contracts,evictions, deportations, deaths inpolice custody, and, of course, thearms trade. By contrast only 25%of women voters supported theIraq War even though most MPsincluding Yvette Cooper support-ed it. Corbyn did not - he has con-sistently been anti-war. As aresult, his leadership has attract-ed not just new members, butthose who left the party.

When Corbyn won so unexpect-edly, there was much criticism of

and more modern roles andresponsibilities that will shapethe agenda: Business, Innovationand Skills (Angela Eagle),Defence (Maria Eagle), Education(Lucy Powell), Energy andClimate Change (Lisa Nandy),Environment, Food and RuralAffairs (Kerry McCarthy), Health(Heidi Alexander), InternationalDevelopment (Diane Abbott),Leader of the House of Lords(Baroness Angela Smith),Transport ( Lilian Greenwood),Wales (Nia Griffith),Women andEqualities (Kate Green), ChiefWhip (Rosie Winterton),Environment (Kerry MacCarthy),Attorney General (CatherineMcKinnley) and Chief Secretaryto the Treasury (SeemaMalhotra). Young People andVoter Registration (Gloria dePiero) is a new shadow ministeri-al post, as is Shadow Minister forMental Health (Luciana Berger).25% of the adult population and10% of all children are affected bymental health difficulties withwomen often the main carer.

All these posts are as signifi-cant as any Home Secretary orChancellor. Women who haveturned down one position, wherethey have not agreed withCorbyn, have been offered andbeen able to take another. Womenat all levels of the party and with-in the Trade Union Movementwill and must play a major role inthis process if Labour is toachieve a more decent society.Underlying all these discourseswill be the challenge of inequali-ties in all forms. Women will finda way to re-engage in publicdebate, public life and public ser-vice, without being branded asextremists.

Women will win for Labour.

his so called 'problem withwomen'. It began with his raisingthe debate about 'women only'carriages on trains. It continuedwith (and was compared to) hisselection of a Shadow Cabinet,where he was accused of rampantsexism from all sides of the politi-cal spectrum. Did women reallyhave equal status within theShadow Cabinet, or was this oldstyle misogynistic Marxism? The(so-called) four great offices ofstate: Prime Minister, Chancellorof the Exchequer, Home Secretaryand Foreign Secretary were allallocated to men. It was immedi-ately pointed out that these posi-tions were given that title in acolonial era, when Britain ruledthe waves, and a time whenwomen and most of the workingclasses were disenfranchised.

In fact Angela Eagle, appointedas Shadow First Secretary ofState has now become de factoDeputy Leader in Parliament aswell as her role as BusinessSecretary.

Female representation in theCommons is now at an all-timehigh in the UK of 29%. Labourhas the highest proportion ofwomen in any party at 43%. Thecurrent shadow cabinet has 16women and 15 men, (the Torieshave 7 out of 21) - the first evermajority female shadow cabinetin history.

Does this matter, and does itprovide sufficient incentive forwomen voters to support the newOpposition? Corbyn has alreadyshown a capacity to accommodatecriticism and the debates will con-tinue. At present the argumentthat is now being put forward inShadow Cabinet is that womenhold posts that centre on morerelevant topics today, and oneswhich are more likely to benefitwomen.

A brief perusal of the women inthe new shadow cabinet reveals agood distribution of traditional

Gender inequality - a vote winner?Patricia d'Ardenne challenges the Tory policies widening inequalities

WOMEN

Women will find a way to reengage inpublic debate, public life and publicservice, without being branded asextremists

FOR THE RECORD

Patriciad’Ardenne is aveteran ofstudent protestin 1968, NHSconsultant andLabour Partyactivist in theCity of London

Corbyn’s first cabinet: a majority are women

Key policy announcements - quick reference guide

Europe“Being in Europe has protected

and improved workers' rights inBritain, giving everyone statutorypaid holiday, limits on workinghours and improved maternityand paternity leave.

"We are strongly opposed toany attempt by David Cameron totry and weaken these, but thetruth is if we want to protectworkers' rights the answer isn't toleave the EU, but to get rid of thisTory Government.

“That's why the Labour Party has always been com-mitted to not walking away, but staying in to worktogether for a better Europe.”

Hilary Benn, Shadow Foreign SecretarySource: Independent 20/09/15

Transport"We know there is over-

whelming support from theBritish people for a People'sRailway, better and more effi-cient services, proper integra-tion and fairer fares.On thisissue, it won't work to have anearly but not quite position.Labour will commit to a clearplan for a fully integrated rail-way in public ownership."

Jeremy Corbyn Source: Sunday Mirror 20/09/15

“We are going to start from the principle thatfranchises will be brought into public ownershipwhen they expire…Labour’s new rail taskforce willlook at ways of slashing thecost to taxpayers of subsidis-ing Britain’s “heavily frag-mented” rail network whichis up to 40% less efficientthan the best European rail-ways.”

Lillian Greenwood,Shadow TransportSecretary

Footnote: A Trades Union Congress report saidthat if the 11 franchises due to be renewed by 2020were awarded to a single public body instead of pri-vate operators, £520m would be saved on shareholderdividends and £240m on dividends to Network Railsubcontractors.

Packed out meeting halls, queues outside, deafeningapplause, new volunteers, TV debates and hustings.Many saw parallels

between the electrifyingScottish referendum andthe Corbyn leadershipcampaign with the mobil-isation of hundreds ofthousands to rallies anddiscussions. Corbynpacked a whirlwind 100-venue UK wide speakingtour into just threemonths. But the energyand enthusiasm wasinfectious. Now this hasto be translated intoactivists and politicallysussed campaigners fordem-soc Labour.

Two big electoral tests will come next May with theHolyrood elections in Scotland and the London Mayoral

Key electoral tests: Winning in Scotland and Londonelections in London. Sadiq Khan triumphed in the Londonballot, easily beating Tessa Jowell with 58% in the third

round. He will be the firstAsian Muslim candidatefor the post but startswith a fair wind. InScotland the battle will beequally tough but ifScottish Labour candi-dates embrace the politicsof the Corbyn campaignand put up real oppositionto the Tories and SNP,opposing austerity andTrident renewal but alsochampioning greaterdemocratic control andsocialist economic poli-cies, then the outcomecould begin to reverse the

damage of the May general election and the almost totalLabour wipe-out.

Education“Academies and free schools

will remain. They will still existas schools, but they will comeunder a different accountabilitysystem that will be local…Insome places that will be the localauthority; in other places thatmay be the combined authority;and in other places it might bean elected mayor.”

Lucy Powell, Shadow Education SecretarySource: TES 18/09/15


Labour Conference Special 2015 CHARTIST 76 CHARTIST Labour Conference Special 2015

Iam sure you will join me ingiving my warm congratula-tions to Jeremy, and toTom. After the disappoint-ment of the general election

result, few would have dreamedwe'd see so many people - espe-cially young people - cramminginto town halls, wanting to getinvolved; few would have daredhope that Labour had a chance ofbecoming a genuinely mass partyonce again.

Labour's purpose is clear: todeliver wealth and opportunity tothe many and not the few. Thatmeans winning a general electionto deliver it. So now the contestis over, on behalf of working peo-ple my message to Labour is this:look sharp; pull together; and dowhat working people are cryingout for her Majesty's Oppositionto do - get stuck in and oppose.

The slogan for this TradesUnion Congress is great jobs foreveryone. That means: fair pay,secure contracts, time to spendwith your family, a voice at workand respect for a job well done.

But Britain’s unions don’t justwant a fair share of the cake forworkers. We know we have togrow the cake too.

Building a sustainable recov-ery, raising investment and pro-ductivity. Yes, and raising wagesand living standards too. Wewant a practical plan to deliverfair shares and greener growthfor all.

You would think that it's whatthe government would want too.

But then they'd have to comeup with some fresh ideas.

After all, we've already had fiveyears of their failed remedy.

Remember when they told usthat austerity would wipe theslate clean?

The Chancellor slashed taxesfor the idle rich and slashed bene-fits for the working poor.

But we still have a currentaccount deficit on a scale unprece-dented in peace time. We havethe slowest recovery on record.And our balance of trade justkeeps getting worse.

There is a better plan forBritain. The Government shouldtalk to businesses and unionsabout how to deliver it.

So it seems that this govern-

different to any other worker:hoping for a better life; contribut-ing to our country; facing thesame struggle to earn a decentliving.

Just like my family who camehere from Ireland – just like somany of all of our families.

And then there’s the EuropeanUnion. Our country's prime min-ister in an undignified scuttlearound the capitals of Europe,thumping tables, desperate tofind some red meat to throw to hisbackbenchers.

If David Cameron was reallybattling for blue collar Britain,he’d be fighting for strongerrights. To stop bosses gettingaway with pitting worker againstworker to undercut pay.

Fighting for an investmentplan so our young people havegood job opportunities and fight-ing against trade agreements likeTTIP, and secret courts, to stopbig corporations cannibalising ourpublic services.

The Conservative Party nolonger represents the interests ofindustry in general. Its main pur-pose is to serve just one. Globalfinance; it's become the politicalwing of the City of London.

You know, the Conservativestake every opportunity to claimthat Labour is in the pocket of theunions. As if the small amountsof hard earned money given freelyby thousands of nurses, shopworkers and refuse collectors wassomething to sneer about.

But the Conservative Party isin a pocket that's a whole lot larg-er. It belongs to just a handful ofrich men. There is only one wayGeorge Osborne's strategy todivide people and crush dissentwill succeed. And that's if goodpeople of conscience stay silent.

But I can tell you this, the gov-ernment has woefully miscalcu-lated the resilience of workingpeople and their unions. I ask youto support the campaign planendorsed by your GeneralCouncil.

For a fair economy, strongrights at work, great jobs foreveryone, world-class public ser-vices; and for a free trade unionmovement.

Let's unite; let's stand proudtogether; and let's fight to win

TRADE UNIONS

Long haulSCOTLAND

ment’s top priority isn’t gettingBritain back on its feet. Instead,it wants to cut Britain’s unions offat the knees. Barely had theConservatives took office, than itpublished its TU reform bill.

History will remember this billas the biggest attack in thirtyyears. Not just against tradeunions but against our bestchance of raising productivity,pay and demand. Because here isa simple truth: you can't createwealth without the workforce.You can't spread that wealtharound fairly without tradeunions.

So I make no apologies fordefending strong trade unions,including making sure they havethe right to strike – if they needto. If an employer believed wecouldn’t strike, it wouldn’t botherto bargain.

We wouldn’t have safe work-places, we wouldn’t have paid hol-idays; and – let’s remember theFord sewing machinists - wewouldn’t have equal pay.

But it would be a mistake tosee this attack on unions in isola-tion. It is part of a political strate-gy to keep the Conservatives inpower for a generation.

They know that globalisationhas created losers, as well as win-ners. They know that extremelyunequal societies can becomeextremely unstable. So they’vetaken lessons from rightwingfriends around the world – theUS republicans, Tony Abbott inAustralia.

And the key lesson? Targetthose blue collar workers who feelforgotten, derided and ripped off;who can’t see any future of skilledjobs or decent reward for a hardweek’s work.

Then tell them that the Toriesare on their side.Tell them youfeel their pain. Tell them it's allthe migrants’ fault. Whip uphatred of claimants. Then stealthe TUC’s clothes by promisingthe working poor a pay rise.

Never mind that most peopleon benefits are working. Andnever mind that migrants are no

A welcome changeFrances O'Grady calls for unity and mutual respect in the new era

Frances O’Gradyis GeneralSecretary of theTUC

This is anshortenedversion of herspeech to TUCAnnual Congress 2015

Reproduced withpermission

Let's unite; let's stand proudtogether; and let's fight to win

Katy Clark cautions on over-optimism for the Holyrood elections

Rebuilding Labour inScotland won't be aneasy task. The melt-down of the Labourvote at the General

Election had been a long timecoming. Scottish Labour has beenlosing elections for years - atlocal, Scottish and European lev-els. All the warning signs werethere. In many parts of Scotlandpeople had got used to voting indifferent ways in different elec-tions year after year. The SNPfirst won the largest number ofseats in the Scottish Parliamentin 2007 in a shock result theScottish Labour establishmenthas still not really recoveredfrom. In 2011 the SNP then wonan absolute majority in theScottish Parliament. The ScottishLabour Party lost many so called‘safe’ seats at that election andthe results then were consideredappalling for Labour.

The voting system makes it dif-ficult to predict accurately thenumber of seats Scottish Labourmight win next May. If theGeneral Election results inScotland are repeated or recentopinion polls borne out at ScottishParliament elections next May,the worst case scenario is thatScottish Labour could be left withas few as 12 to 20 seats in theParliament far fewer than the 38we currently hold which was con-sidered a disaster in 2011.

A common response on thedoorstep when canvassing forvotes over many years has been"well it will be either Labour orSNP" and that remained the posi-tion right up to the referendum.Warnings were repeatedly givenby some in the Scottish LabourParty to the UK leadership overmore than a decade. WhenLabour was in power the responsewould come that those complain-ing simply didn't understand thepolicies which had not been com-municated well enough.

Social attitudes are very simi-lar in Scotland to the rest of theUK. But the political discourse isdifferent. Scottish voters havevoted for the Tories in far smallernumbers than in England andWales.

The New Labour project hasbeen unpopular in large parts of

Scotland (and other parts of theUK) for a long time. The differ-ence in Scotland is that Labourhas had competition. The SNPrecognised many decades ago thatthey could not win in Scotland asthe ‘tartan Tories’. To achievetheir dream of Scottish indepen-dence and to be a significantpolitical force they needed peopleto vote for them in the major pop-ulation centres in Scotland - inthe central belt and west coastwith their strong industrial histo-ry and labour movement tradi-tion. They have therefore deliber-ately repackaged themselves tobecome attractive to what arenow former Labour voters.

Of course many of the peoplewho have joined the SNP over thelast 30 years do have progressivevalues. But whilst the Party hasbeen careful to wrap itself in thered flag and present itself as left

wing the reality of what it does inpower on many areas of policysuch as taxation, transport andenergy could not be consideredleft wing.

Despite all of this if theScottish independence referen-dum had not happened I think itis likely that Labour would havedone well again in Scotland at theGeneral Election. HoweverLabour’s behaviour during thevery long referendum campaignand probably also immediatelyafterwards eroded trust to suchan extent that Scottish Labourbecame a toxic brand. There is lit-tle doubt that the way the Yescampaign persuaded much of theleft of centre in every communitythat social justice was no longerpossible through Westminsterand that a Yes vote could ‘endTory rule forever’ was a signifi-cant factor. The Better Togethercampaign and the cross partycampaign with the Tories lookeddesperate and unprincipled.Senior figures in the trade unionsand many others had warnedagainst it and many local Partiessuch as in North Ayrshire onlycampaigned for a No vote throughthe United with Labour cam-

paign. The tidal wave did not dif-ferentiate to any significantextent between candidates in Mayas the electorate were quite clearthat it was the Scottish Labourbrand they were rejecting notindividuals.

The election of Jeremy Corbynand the repositioning of Labouron issues such as privatisationand the economy will help to startrebuilding in Scotland. JimMurphy accepted that ScottishLabour needed to move to the left.Unfortunately what he did lookedcontrived and opportunistic. Theauthenticity of Jeremy Corbynand his track record over manydecades will not have the sameproblem. It will be easier for peo-ple to accept that Labour haschanged. But that does not meanthat things will be easy and weshould not expect quick results.Scottish Labour needs to startbuilding itself from the bottomup. The Party needs to give localcampaigners the policies to dothat. Far too much of Scottish pol-itics is far too negative. Peopleare desperately seeking a betterkind of politics, serious strategiesto redevelop the economies of theformer industrial heartlands andnew forms of democracy whichgive us greater power over theway we lead our lives.

Labour will start winning elec-toral positions again in Scotlandwhen we embrace this radicalismand when we are able to givehope. A century after KeirHardie's death his vision andthose of the early socialists arethe ones we need to look to as wedevelop a politics which trulytakes on the vested interests andwhich has the capacity to liberatethe peoples of all parts of theseislands. Let's commit to do thattogether.

People are desperately seeking abetter kind of politics

London and Edinburgh joined at the hip

Katy Clark wasLabour MP forNorth Ayrshireand Arran from2005 until 2015


8 CHARTIST Labour Conference Special 2015 Labour Conference Special 2015 CHARTIST 9

We have much to learn about the pro-posed policies of the new Corbynteam. But we know that Corbynomicsis vehemently anti-austerity. HerMajesty’s Official Opposition is deter-

mined to reverse the policies promoted by theConservative government and its allies.

These policies have led to a bailout of the bankersthat caused the crisis (via so-called QuantitativeEasing, QE, ) but also via the nationalization of thelosses of private banks like RBS, Northern Rock andLloyds). At the same time, both the Coalition andConservative governments used the crisis and itsaftermath as an opportunity to slash not just thewelfare state, but the state itself.

Corbynomics would reverse this state of affairs byending such attacks, and by taxing bankers andother powerful entities that evade or avoid their fairshare of taxation. They would also draw on the pow-ers of the Bank of England. To achieve a ‘Peoples’QE’.

The Bank’s powers have been used, as notedabove, to bail out the banking system, and manywealthy bankers and other investors. But QE hasgone further: it has led to the asset price inflation-assets being owned chiefly by the wealthy. The eco-nomics profession, the Bank of England, theTreasury and the Conservative government haveturned a blind eye to this inflation.

But when wage or price inflation takes place, thecentral bank, the Treasury and all economists uniteto suppress wage price inflation, often by attackingtrade unionism.

Asset price inflation explains why the rich havegot richer during this crisis, while the rest of us,reliant on wages and benefits or, as with shopkeep-ers, farmers and firms - on prices, have got poorer.

Corbynomics proposes to reverse this state ofaffairs, and to harness the Bank of England to sup-port the economically active as a whole – not justthe wealthy.

[As an aside: the Bank of England was national-ized in 1945 by a Labour government preciselybecause it did not support the economy as a wholeduring the disaster of the 1930s. It is therefore notin the least bit independent. It is in effect a govern-ment department, with some freedom to set interestrates without political interference. )

A Labour government could “harness” the Bank ofEngland, by the Labour Chancellor adding to theBank of England’s existing mandate, and instructthe Bank of England to not address stable prices,but also full employment. The US Federal Reservehas such a mandate, and is asked to manage mone-tary policy and monetary operations in such a wayas to ensure full employment. There is nothing radi-cal in that proposal.

The Bank of England does not “print money”when it engages in monetary operations. It overseesthe Mint, which prints the declining number ofnotes and coins in circulation because we now makemore use of bank transfers and credit cards.

Ninety-five percent of the money in the British

Winning the economic debateeconomy is “printed” by pri-vate banks – each time theymake a loan. So it is privatebanks, not the central bankthat must be regulated toprevent inflation – especial-ly if private banks persist inmaking speculative loans.The Bank of England hasbegun to clamp down but aLabour Chancellor coulddemand more.

The Bank of England doesnot create the money circu-lating throughout the econo-my. It only creates ‘centralbank money’ which is onlyavailable to licensed banks.It cannot therefore beresponsible for price or wageinflation.

The Bank offers bankswhat amounts to a form ofovernight overdraft – toensure that each nightbanks can ‘clear’ orexchange cheques and trans-fers, and balance their lia-bilities and assets in such away as to not go bust.

It can be asked to domore. It can create a form of‘money’ or QE that can onlybe used by banks. It usesthis newly-created ‘money’or ‘liquidity’ to buy assets,e.g. corporate or governmentbonds, from private banks.The Bank of England either holds on to these assets,or waits until an opportune moment and sells them– at a profit. It hands this profit back to theChancellor to help lower the government’s budgetdeficit. It is inflationary – of assets.

But we are living in an era of disinflation (therate at which prices are falling) or even deflation(negative prices.) The causes may be due to oil pricefalls, because global income, or demand is falling.Neoliberal economics has brought us austerity, pri-vatization, the volatility of mobile, unfettered capi-tal movements, “free trade” and the ‘free’ mobility oflabour.

And deflationary pressures at a time when pri-vate debts are still very high, and largely unre-payable, are a profound threat to the economy. Thisis because deflation causes the value of debt (and ofinterest rates) to rise, even as incomes and pricesare falling.

So far from facing the threat of inflation, Britainfaces a graver threat of deflation. And deflation is athreat, because government and banks do not knowhow to reverse it.

Action by the Bank of England to help the govern-ment fund and finance public investment in the

ECONOMICS

kind of projects that will gen-erate income, will help tocounter the threat of defla-tion.

It can keep the base rate ofinterest low, and ensure thatthe government needs onlyborrow at a highly affordablerate of interest -one that islower than the income thatwill be generated by invest-ment to repay the debt.

It can help manage the gov-ernment’s borrowing, by co-ordinating carefully with thegovernment’s DebtManagement Office – whichissues government bonds orgilts.

It can help keep privatebanks afloat, and set condi-tions and penalties for centralbank support, i.e. to investproductively, not speculative-ly. This pressure would helpincrease lending into the realeconomy, and finance privateinvestment at very low ratesof interest.

Finally, at a push, theBank of England could launchsomething known as“Helicopter Money” – bydirectly sending say, £6,000to every British household.For example, the Chancellorcould give every taxpayer abreak of £6,000 – by cutting

taxes. Alistair Darling did something like this afterthe crisis when he cut VAT. President Obama didthis when after the crisis he spent $152bn in taxrebates for low and middle income earners, and taxincentives for firms. There is general agreementthat this stimulus helped the US recovery. So aLabour Chancellor could do just as much as a civilservant at the Bank of England to revive the econo-my, with no threat at all of such expenditure caus-ing inflation. On the contrary, it may well help tostabilize prices.

Mrs Thatcher once famously said that: “There isno such thing as public money. There is only taxpay-ers’ money.” This assertion is repeated ad nauseumby politicians in all political parties. Liam Byrne forexample made the point that “there is no moneyleft” in his famous note written on departure fromthe Treasury.

While tax revenues are important for maintain-ing balance in the government’s accounts, the gov-ernment does not rely on current income from taxa-tion for expenditure. Just as a household does notchoose to pay for a house or a car by first saving ashare of monthly income, so government does notneed to finance expenditure out of current income.

Ann Pettifor offers some friendly advice about how to overturn anti-austerity policies

The British government can borrow for sound,long-term investment – that will in due course gen-erate income to repay the debt. It can do so, becausedespite everything, Britain is a rich country, withtalented, well-educated citizens, great infrastruc-ture, a good health system and with a sound reputa-tion in international financial circles. As a result,the British government is considered a safe bor-rower, and can borrow at low, indeed almost nega-tive (in terms of inflation) rates of interest. TheBritish government is wise to borrow at very lowrates, because government investment in non-specu-lative projects creates employment. And as we allknow, employment generates income.

In the case of the individual, employment gener-ates a wage, or monthly page cheque. For the gov-ernment, employment generates tax revenues, inparticular income tax revenues. Once the wage-earner has an income, he invariably spends it, andthe government then earns more tax income – thistime from VAT. The shopkeeper hopefully makes aprofit – and pays the government again – in theform of capital gains tax.

So one employed person can generate threestreams of income for a government.

Which is why John Maynard Keynes alwaysargued that it was vitally important for govern-ments to first and foremost “look after employment,then the budget will look after itself.” The best wayto cut the deficit, is to create full employment –high-skilled, well-paid employment. It is onlyemployment that will cut the deficit.

Right now unemployment is at 5.5% with manyyoung people losing hope of decent, well-paid, securejobs – and is still far too high. Only when unem-ployment gets down to 1-2% will Britain beapproaching full employment. At that point the bud-get will be as close to balance as is possible.

Labour should therefore be campaigning along-side the TUC for more secure, highly-skilled, well-paid employment. Because only full employmentwill cut the deficit.

The Tory Chancellor claims he will cut the deficit,balance the books, and live within our means. Butthe Chancellor cannot cut the deficit. The govern-ment cannot balance the books because the govern-ment is not like a household which can balance itsbudget by cutting spending or increasing income.The government’s budget does not depend on whatthe government does –but on what happens in theeconomy.

If private companies (like banks) go bust, makingthousands unemployed – the government’s budgetdeficit quickly rises. Why? Because the unemployeddon’t pay taxes. Worse, the government has to payunemployment benefits!

However, if government borrows to spend andinvest – in the kind of income-generating projectsthat create employment – then government (tax)income will rise and transfers (unemployment bene-fits, etc.,) will fall.

That is how Labour will win the economic debate!

Ann Pettifor isDirector: PolicyResearch inMacroeconomics(PRIME)

Bank of England : there’s more riding on it than you might think


Labour Conference Special 2015 CHARTIST 11 10 CHARTIST Labour Conference Special 2015

the Party shifted so far to theright that I became stereotypedas “hard left”.

If I am “hard left”, then so isJeremy but it is a meaningless,pejorative term. The JeremyCorbyn I know is not Old Labour.He has always been a strongadvocate of civil liberties andopposed New Labour’s attacks,such as limiting the right to jurytrial. He embraced gay rightswhen New Labour was beingdragged through the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights, and heopposed Saddam Hussein whenhe was an ally of the West. Herecognises the imperative of act-ing on climate change and theimportance of a symbiotic rela-tionship between the state andprivate sector to achieve ahealthy, sustainable economy.

Looked at evidence

He is not advocating top-downnationalisation but new methodsof holding monopolies to account.This will involve changing therules that prevent the public sec-tor competing for privatised ser-vices and encourage the interven-tion of new players such as co-ops,community organisations andlocal authorities. Jeremy haslooked at evidence that showsthat PFI deals and run downsocial housing make no economicsense and are bad for society, so ifthat is backward looking, then sobe it, but remember, many con-servatives share this view.

As none other than Nobel prizewinning economist Paul Krugmanhas pointed out, Jeremy was theonly leadership candidate to chal-lenge the bogus Conservativearguments justifying the need forausterity. He accuses almost allUK news media of not only failingto subject Tory claims to hardscrutiny, but also of reportingthem as facts.Why did we allowthem to get away with it?

Now we have an opportunity toshow how the Labour Party is rel-evant to the majority of voters. Ipredict that many MPs will bepleasantly surprised by Jeremy’snew way of working.

The Labour Party nowhas twice as manymembers as theWomen’s Institute andthe potential to outstrip

the numbers supporting theRSPB. This is an amazingachievement that can undoubted-ly be attributed to the Corbyneffect. I still have in my posses-sion a letter from Tony Blairtelling me of his goal to reach halfa million members by 2001. By2001, the number of Party mem-bers declined to fewer than thatbequeathed by John Smith.

When Blair won the leadershipin 1994, one of his first acts wasto fly to Australia to get RupertMurdoch’s backing. Although wecan be thankful that JeremyCorbyn will not be curryingfavour in this way, we canalready see an onslaught from themedia that makes the treatmentmeted out to Kinnock andMiliband seem restrained. Eventrusted organisations like theGuardian and the BBC are usingsubtle means to undermine aleader who is perceived to threat-en the established order. Thismakes grassroots activity to buildtrust within our communitiesmore vital. So cial media will beimportant but let us not fool our-selves that a few tweets orFacebook entries, generallypreaching to the converted, willsuffice! We must accept that it isthe responsibility of every CLPand branch to harness the enthu-siasm of new members and sup-porters to reach out in our localcommunities.

Importance of Party unity

It is the responsibility of theParliamentary Labour Party toensure that we cannot be por-trayed as a divided party. So howdifficult will this be? How cansomeone like me, a serial rebelwhilst a Labour MP, pontificateon the importance of Party unity?

My answer is that you don’t getunity by riding roughshod overthe core values of our Party or bydismantling or manipulating thedemocratic processes through

which people should feel they canexert an influence. The use ofthese methods is well-document-ed: controlling debates atConference and requiring voteson unamendable documents;denying people the opportunity ofserving on select committees(Jeremy was one); ignoring theresults of “consultations” to theextent that there is little interestin participating. Above all, therehas been, within theParliamentary Party, the ruth-less exploitation of the power ofpatronage and, when all elsefails, the use of bullying and arm-twisting.

What I have absolute confi-dence in is that Jeremy Corbynunderstands, more than anyother leader, the importance ofParty unity. That’s because he

understands why we, the “usualsuspects”, felt forced to defy thewhip and why so many partymembers left in disgust at thebetrayal of their fundamentalbeliefs.

What we don’t want is a mirrorimage of what went before, a so-called hard left takeover usingthe same discredited measures toexclude other points of view.Even though Jeremy has demon-strated his intention not to godown this path, it is claimed thatmany of his supporters are“intent on revenge” and that helacks the authority to restrainthem. I beg to differ, he has theauthority given by party mem-bers.

It is claimed that Jeremy hasno response to the challenges ofthe modern world and is a back-ward-looking member of OldLabour. I have never regardedmyself as Old Labour, alwaysbeing a strong advocate, forexample, of our membership ofEurope and industrial democracy.I was labelled a right winger inthe seventies. My views didn’tchange substantively, except Ibecame more of a feminist. But

Mushrooming membersFormer Campaign Group chair Lynne Jones celebrates loyalty to Labour values

PEOPLE POWER

Both before and after hewas elected partyLeader, JeremyCorbyn undertook toincrease participative

democracy for Party members.The Conference promises oppor-tunities. A number of relevantrule changes were circulated tomembers in May by theCampaign for Labour PartyDemocracy (CLPD). Hopefullymany will be carried.

Several are designed toempower Constituency LabourParties (CLPs). There is a propos-al to double the number ofNational Executive Committee(NEC) seats reserved for CLPrepresentatives from six to twelve(including two from Scotland andWales). This would give CLPs31% of NEC seats thus increasinggrass roots influence. There is awelcome proposal to introduce anNEC appointed PartyOmbudsperson to hear anddecide on members’ complaintsabout the way the Party hastreated them and on breaches ofParty rules for example by Partystaff. This measure was original-ly floated in the 2007 LabOURCommission Report.

Moving on to Conference:there is a rule change mooted toguarantee that eight contempo-rary motions are debated (fourfrom CLPs and four from unions).In the current priorities ballotthe rules are so unclear to dele-gates that Conference usuallyends up debating only five out ofa possible eight. Another proposalwould abolish the term “contem-porary” for policy resolutions. Inpractice these have to relate to anevent in the month beforeConference. This amendmentwould widen their scope butwould exclude subjects addressedby NEC and NPF (NationalPolicy Forum) reports. Instead ofthe NPF having total control ofthe Party’s rolling policy pro-gramme, which Conference canonly accept or reject as a whole,there is a proposal that the NPFshould establish its own policycommissions which would reviewthe programme annually includ-

ing all new conference resolu-tions. These revised documentswould then be circulated to CLPs,union affiliates, Young Labourand Labour Councillors. Thesewould be able to submit amend-ments to NPF policy commissionsto amend. The NPF would thendecide on each document andreturn it to Party Conferencewhich would make the final deci-sion. Grass roots members wouldthus have a greater input than atpresent.

Currently CLPs have to opteach year to put forward a rulechange or a contemporary motionor neither. This is unduly restric-tive. Another proposal wouldallow them to do both. Currentlywhen CLPs propose a Party rulechange one year, they have towait another year for Conferenceto consider it. This is an anomaly

dating from a defunct 1960sparty rule. CLP proposed rulechanges should be debated theyear that they are submitted.

There are proposed rulechanges relating to the selectionand retention of ParliamentaryCandidates. During the NewLabour period candidates wereoften imposed by the NEC at thebehest of the leadership so localParty members had no input intothe selection of their candidateand MP with whom they mightbe stuck for many years.Beneficiaries of impositionincluded Chris Leslie and Gloriade Piero. A proposed rule changewould restrict imposition toextreme cases. In the case ofimposition of a shortlist or a can-didate, decisions would be takenby a panel of equal numbers ofNEC members and representa-tives of the CLP. There is a rulemooted to stop branches nominat-ing in PPC selections merely fromCVs and superficial meet andgreet sessions. Instead party andaffiliated member branches

would have the right to interviewaspiring candidates adequatelyand make nominations.

Finally, a rule change circulat-ed to party members in May, longbefore the Corbyn surge, containsa proposal to abolish the triggermechanism and reinstate manda-tory reselection. MPs would facea normal reselection with the pro-viso that if they obtained an over-whelming proportion of nomina-tions the NEC would declarethem reselected. Otherwise a nor-mal reselection would go aheadwith the MP included in theshortlist. At present constituen-cies can be stuck with anidle/unaccountable MP becausethe trigger is so difficult to pull.

Other action is necessary toopen up the Party. The over-whelming democratic election ofCorbyn must be openly accepted;especially by MPs. CLPs shoulduse General Committees, otherparty meetings, seminars andmeetings at Conference to discusswith MPs how they support theleadership. They should bear inmind that the present leaderwas elected by the largest evermajority of electors including amajority of full Party membersvoting. It is vital that new partymembers, affiliates and support-ers are welcomed and encouragedto participate in party meetings,socials and campaigns. They mayneed support and information tounderstand party procedures,rules and policy making process-es. It is essential that we mustbecome a united and democrati-cally run party again.

The overwhelming democraticelection of Corbyn must be openlyaccepted; especially by MPs

Why did we allow them to get awaywith it?

Will Conference help or hinder?Veteran campaigner for party democracy Gaye Johnston reviews opportunities in 2015

PARTY DEMOCRACY

Gaye Johnston isa Vice Chair ofthe Campaign forLabour PartyDemocracy andformer Vice Chairof the LabourDemocraticNetwork. Herbook “NewLabour; was thepain worth thegain?” will bepublished on theinternet inOctober 2015.

For more information see www.gayejohnston-writer.com

Lynne Jones wasthe Labour MPfor BirminghamSelly Oakbetween 1992and 2010.

She is a formerChair of theSocialistCampaign Groupof Labour MPsand is now activein Brecon andRadnorshireConstituencyLabour Party

Email: [email protected] Twitter @lynnejones_exMP



Labour is left in southernEngland outsideLondon, if our definitionis south of the Severn-Wash line, with one MP

in Exeter, Cambridge, Oxford,Slough and Southampton, andthree in Bristol - a total of eight.In 1987 there were three. In 1997the total shot up to 45, thendropped back to 10 in 2010. Wedid best where the LibDems col-lapsed, but the flip side was sodid the Conservatives whereLabour supporters had previouslyhelped deliver LibDem MPs.

Pamphleteers have drawnattention to Labour’s “southerndiscomfort”, but research showsthat southern voters are not verydifferent. It is not policy but com-munication. During elections allmessages are targeted atmarginals. Party members andvoters exist but without council-lors, or MPs, their work is nottranslated into votes that count.

Making seats broadly reflectthe votes has always been resist-ed because MPs in Labourstrongholds don’t see that pro-gressive people don’t always voteLabour. Fortunately, TradeUnions have a presence in mostconstituencies. Led by the PCS,the TUC will commission inde-pendent research into electoralreform and draw up recommenda-tions. In moving their resolution,Kevin McHugh noted that theConservative government waselected on just 24 per cent of theelectorate. This is the registeredelectorate.

The late Robin Cook used tosay we ought to give Conferencemedals to all Labour voters inSurrey who have voted Labourwithout ever achieving represen-tation. What we need to recog-nise is that people who want aLabour government cannotalways do this by voting Labour.The voting system is broken. In2015 people voted as if we had aPR system. The Conservativesunderstood how not to lose toUKIP whereas some in Labourcomplacently assumed that UKIPwould let them in by taking Toryvotes. The dog that hadn’t barkedin past elections made anentrance. Conservatives had

VOTING

Converting the SouthMary Southcott ponders mission impossible

always piled up votes in seatsthey won massively. Now usingAshcroft polling they targetedruthlessly with individually tai-lored arguments. Two thingscame together, Tory targeting inTory marginals against Labourand LibDems and the willingnessof voters to vote as if we had a PRelection. People are no longerconstrained by the first past thepost straitjacket into choosingwhether they preferred a Labouror Conservative led government.

Labour should tackle UKIP bycountering their arguments andstop taking people in safe Labourseats for granted. Some of theintelligent opposition to electoralreform back in the 1990s arguedthat once you gave people a choicepeople would stop voting Labour.Well now they have a PR choice

with UKIP for working class andthe Green Party for middle classwhite people.

Some cannot see how Labour’sputting a PR commitment into its2020 manifesto can have anyeffect on the 2020 general elec-tion. But it will represent Labourhas changed, moved away fromtribalism and is willing to workcross party to find solutions.Labour has stopped thinking thatall we need to do is win over themarginal voter in a Conservative-Labour marginal. The risk ofonly addressing this audience, theimperative under first past thepost, is that we are talking tofewer and fewer people. Andwhen boundaries are drawn wehaven’t spoken to people whomove into some constituenciesdiluting the potential Labourvote.

This will be particularly truewhen registered voters inDecember 2015 are used to drawup the 2020 boundaries unless wespend from now ensuring peopleare registered. Particularly weneed people coming up to 18,“attainers”, on the register. Weknow that the population of uni-versity constituencies is vastlyunderestimated but the problem

affects many young people whomove, often in private rentedaccommodation, often withshared letter boxes with mailnever sent on.

Hope not Hate has identifiedthat the already unregisteredseven and a half millions are dis-proportionately the young, thepoor and those from minoritycommunities not only the groupsthat need representation most butare more likely to vote Labour. Bevery sure that those in settledaccommodation particularly inthe “South” will be registered. Solocally led voter registration is amust in our inner cities, in ourLabour heartlands, everywhere.

Thirteen failed Labour candi-dates wrote: “Establishing Labouras a Southern party, with a tradi-tion of support, will require a con-sistent strategy over many years,and one that looks beyond theultra-targeting in key seats.Constituencies do not exist in iso-lation – friends, family and(increasingly) colleagues live inneighbouring ‘non-target’ con-stituencies. Labour needs torecognise, support and encourageactivism across the whole of ourregions if we want to build ourpresence, be a party for the wholeof the South and the UK, andwin.

Labour retreat is a self-fulfill-ing prophecy. Unfortunately the“South” is not just in the south.It is surrogate for Tory shires.We need to address everyone inall elections if we are to be aparty which has a presence inevery region, county and countryand have any claim to be anational party rather than one ofthe north, Wales and London.“Labour’s Learning the Lessons” -people need to hear this debatebefore we all become the “South”.

Mary Southcottworks with theLabour Campaignfor ElectoralReform and isactive in Bristolpolitics

INVESTMENT

Britain needs to get rebuildingHousing policy guru Duncan Bowie makes the case

With Jeremy Corbynas Labour Partyleader, and SadiqKhan as Mayoralcandidate, the

Labour Party needs to develop aprogramme for the reconstructionof Britain. While the UK econom-ic base is now stronger that it hasbeen for some years, investmentin housing and the basic infras-tructure of the country has notbeen given sufficient priority overthe last four decades. We are awealthy country that can fundmega-projects such as theOlympics but which has failed tomaintain its housing stock, andhas run down its stock of councilhousing. Transport investmentfunding has been focused onfuture major projects such asCrossrail, High Speed One(Eurostar) and now High Speed 2,which are mainly of benefit toLondon and the Southeast, whiletransport infrastructure in otherparts of the country is inade-quate.

Not adequately invested

For decades we have not ade-quately invested in utilities andwe are facing water shortages andan inadequate sewage disposalsystem. Britain’s population isincreasing faster than anticipat-ed, partly reflecting both our eco-nomic success and the economicand political vulnerabilities ofother countries.

From a national perspective,Britain has recovered from the2008 recession. But the recoveryhas not been equal across thewhole country. Even in the pros-perous SouthEast, the gapbetween rich and poor hasincreased rather than decreased.Part of the support Corbyn hasreceived is due to a widespreadview that the politics of recentgovernments has done little forlower income households. So thecore issue for our new leaders isnot economic growth per se buthow to invest in infrastructureand services for all householdsand ensure that all householdsare able to access these resources– this is the Benthamite agendaof seeking to ensure that

Government achieves the greatestgood for the greatest number ofpeople – the many not the few. Aswealth is currently narrowly con-centrated and largely privatelyowned, perhaps not quite 1:99,but perhaps 20:80, this demandsa redistributionist agenda.Ashome ownership is now the mainsource of wealth appreciation andtherefore inequality, as Corbynrecognises, this issue has to betackled head on.

Labour went into the last gen-eral election committing a futureGovernment to spending no morethan the coalition governmentand reducing the deficit. In 2008,Labour was cautious about oper-ating Keynesian measures toincrease spending as a counter-cyclical measure to maintain eco-nomic stability in a market down-turn. The position is now very dif-

ferent. What Labour has failed torecognise in recent years is thatjust as decisions on spending pri-orities are a matter of politicalchoice, so decisions as to how toraise the revenue to fund invest-ment and services is also a matterof political choice. In both the2010 and 2015 election cam-paigns, Labour got locked intodebates about the form spendingcuts would take, because it wasnot prepared to argue the positivecase for tax. Tax is, after all, acommunity contribution from cor-porations and individuals whocan afford to contribute. The pro-ceeds ensure a basic standard ofservices and quality of live forthose less fortunate.

Richard Murphy, who isCorbyn’s economic adviser andhas written for Chartist in thepast, argued this case in his 2011book, the Courageous State. Asfar as housing is concerned,myself and others have argued inChartist and elsewhere that weneed a policy of investment insocial housing and a property andland tax system which incentivis-es the effective use of housing andappropriate new housing develop-

ment and which is focused onmeeting housing needs ratherthan just facilitating wealthappreciation by investors,whether UK based or internation-al. The same argument applies inthe case of transport and utilitiesand components of social infras-tructure such as schools and hos-pitals. Any role for privatefinance and private managementshould be within the overall objec-tive as to whether this is of bene-fit to the users of these services.

Relatively simple

The options for tax policy arerelatively simple and not novel –a more progressive income tax, awealth tax, taxes on asset appre-ciation and reforms to council taxto introduce a more progressivesystem and which incentivise themost effective use of the housingstock. Labour needs to be muchmore explicit about the limita-tions of the market and the posi-tive role for public ownership –not just at a central governmentlevel but also at regional, localand neighbourhood level. The2008 recession demonstrated howthe market can fail, but the mar-ket never operated for the greatergood even in the pre-2008 boomperiod. It is now the time to arguefor a fundamental shift in theparty’s approach to the state,public investment and taxation.This month’s events have shownthat we have far more public sup-port for our policies than werealised – we owe it to the nextgeneration to act.

We need a policy of investment insocial housing

We need to address everyone in allelections

Duncan Bowie isa senior lecturerin spatialplanning at tneUniversity ofWestminster andReviews Editor ofChartist

Housebuilding: not enough for over 30 years

Labour seats in the South: filling them is the challenge



Current Trident policy has to goKate Hudson on putting Trident into the Strategic Defence and Security Review

The Labour Party nowhas to address its policyon Trident. Not justbecause its new leaderis opposed to nuclear

weapons, but because parliamentwill decide whether or not toreplace them early in 2016. Ofcourse Labour has a policy - cur-rently backing replacement - butthe pre-election National PolicyForum agreed that Tridentshould be included in theStrategic Defence and SecurityReview (SDSR), for a proper con-sideration of whether Britainreally needs nuclear weapons forits security or not.

Labour isn’t in government, soit cannot determine what isincluded in the SDSR. But it hasnevertheless recognised that sucha debate needs to take placebefore the replacement decision.So Labour cannot simply go into aparliamentary Trident vote on itsold policy – this has to be recon-sidered within the party.

Jeremy Corbyn has alreadyindicated that such a debate willtake place within the party andwill inform policy-making on thefuture of Trident. In my experi-ence of speaking at CLP meet-ings, there are two main issuesthat come up in discussion.

One is that having an anti-nuclear policy would be a voteloser and would make Labourlook soft on defence. You onlyneed to look at opinion polls – amajority against Trident for manyyears – and listen to much mili-tary opinion, that Trident is use-less and the money would be bet-ter spent on troops and conven-tional weaponry, to know that

this is an argument from thepast.

The other is jobs. What aboutthe 6,000 jobs in the nuclearweapons sector? The advantage ofhaving a Labour leader who has abackground as a trade union offi-cial is that even though he isfirmly anti-Trident he is also pro-employment. His plans for aDefence Diversification Agency(DDA) will finally deal with one ofthe Labour Party’s chief failures— to provide a just transitionaway from the production ofweapons of mass destruction tosocially productive industrieswith high-skilled jobs.

For too long the Labour leader-ship has used the jobs argumentas cover for its pro-nuclear posi-tion. “You can’t cancel Trident,”they say, “because jobs will belost.”

But extensive research — andcommon sense — shows that withthe money spent on Trident rein-vested, far more skilled jobs couldbe created in sectors that wouldhelp us all, from housing to sus-tainable energy to medical equip-ment.

What has been lacking up untilnow has been the political visionand economic commitment at toplevels of Labour, both to makingthat happen and to assuring theworkforce that this is a genuineand serious commitment.

There can be no doubt thatJeremy has that vision and com-mitment and it is vital that thelabour and trade union movementbacks him up.

Although the question ofTrident replacement has put thison the agenda, it has far widersignificance for industry as awhole — there has to be an indus-trial strategy, not just for thedefence sector, but for Britain’sentire economy.

For this to really work therehas to be genuine workforceinvolvement. This is at the heartof Jeremy’s commitment to aDDA which will be established‘jointly between workers, industryand government.’ This will enablea real transition — a change inthe narrative which the Labourleadership has imposed, awayfrom “weapons are good for jobs”to “jobs with peace and prosperi-ty.”

This is all part of the essentialdebate around Trident. It is verymuch to be welcomed – and it isin the interests of the LabourParty and the country as a whole.

TRIDENT

Kate Hudson issecretary of CND

Twitter: @labourassemblyRegister: www.labourassemblyagainstausterity.org.uk

Hosted b

Supporting the P s eople’s Assembly Against Austerity movement

y

Against AusterityLabour Assembly

Austerity movement.Labour members can be part of the broad based People’s Assembly Against tives to austerity that should feature in Labour’s manifesto and discuss how

-Join us for the Labour Assembly Against Austerity that will look at the alterna

the Tory spending limits in the next Parliament would be a disaster for Labour.living standards have declined under this the government. In contrast, sticking to alternative to austerity, Labour can reach out to a broad coalition of voters whose

ering an !We believe that only a Labour government can deliver this. By o

support a plan for public investment and jobs that can get the economy growing.We reject austerity as a solution to the economic crisis. Instead of cuts, we

undermined the very fabric of our society and increased poverty and inequality. standards of the majority of people. Their ruthless attack on public services has also economy, slowing growth, increasing unemployment and reducing living The Tory-led Coalition’s cuts agenda has caused huge damage to the

Saturday 9th November

ers include

C th i W t PPCMichael Meacher MPJeremy Corbyn MPJohn McDonnell MPDiane Abbott MPAnn PettiforKen LivingstoneOwen JonesSpeak

ty Clark MP Michael ave Anderson P, MP,

eneration Labour our (pc)

abour (pc)licy Forum

Union

Supported by

P, GrMP, Gr P.ahame Morris MP.Lavery P, MP, John McDonnell P, MP, Ian Mearns

P, MP, Dai Havard P, MP, Kelvin Hopkins P, MP, Ian Paul Flynn P, MP, Mary Glindon P, MP, Peter Hain Connarty P, MP, John Cryer P, MP, Paul Farrelly P, MP, Ronnie Campbell P, MP, Katy Clark P, MP, Michael Supporters include: Da

Shelly Asquith, Next GenerKate Taylor o , Young Labour (pc)Conr o ad Landin, Young Labour (pc)Alice P y, Naerry, National Po Pete Willsman, CLPDSteve Turner, Unite the UnionClive Lewis, PPCCat Smith, PPCCatherine West, PPC

9am – 5pm, Birkbeck College, LondonSaturday 9th November,

Advertisements

Ad�for�printer�

Ad�for�TSSA

Jobs with peace and prosperity

The�Socialist�History�SocietyWe� are� a� membership� organisation,� founded� in1992,� which� includes� many� of� Britain's� leadingsocialist� and� labour� historians;� academics,� studentsand�amateur�researchers.We� hold� talks,� lectures,� seminars� and� one-off� con-ferences,�and�seek�to�contribute�to�current�historicaldebates,�controversies�and� the�wider�understandingof� history.� SHS� members� are� engaged� in� historicalstudies� from� a� range� of� Marxist� and� left� perspec-tives.�

An�SHS�subscription�includes�two�issues�of�our�jour-nal�Socialist�History,�one�or�two�historical�pamphletsin� the� Occasional� Publications� series� and� regularnewsletters.� Join� the� SHS� now� and� your� member-ship�extends�to�the�end�of�2016,�giving�you�an�extraissue�of�Socialist�History�and�pamphlet.�

Annual� membership� costs� £25.00� within� the� UK;� tojoin�and�for�further�details�see�

http://socialisthistorysociety�co�uk/join�htm

Trident: time for a rethink


For those of us who watched JeremyCorbyn speaking at events across theUnited Kingdom the scale of his victo-ry should not have come as a surprise.We saw the long queues of people

waiting outside venues, many unable to get in tohear him speak. We also saw the overwhelming-ly positive reaction of those who did hear him.

When the results were announced though,even for us, the numbers were astonish-ing. 422,871 people voted in the leadership elec-tion, of those 251,417 voted for Jeremy. Over88,000 registered supporters, many of whomwere engaging with the party formally for thefirst time or who after Blair, New Labour & Iraqwere re-engaging with us once again, cast theirballot to vote for a fresh start. In the 24 hoursfollowing Jeremy’s victory over 15,000 peopledecided to join the party. We now need to makesure thesepeople arenot justn u m b e r son a ballotor a mem-b e r s h i pd a t a b a s ebut arei n s t e a do u ract iv ists ,part of am a s smovementd e t e r -mined tobuild af a i r e r ,more equal and more compassionate society.

Members and supporters are only going towant to deliver leaflets, knock on doors and talkto voters on behalf of the Labour Party if theyfeel valued and listened to. For too long theLabour leadership have taken our membershipfor granted, depending on members to volunteertheir time to get our message across but ignor-ing their views when they feel it’s inconvenient.

This was most acutely demonstrated recentlyby the way in which the party leadership

shamefully ignored the 2013 conferencevote to re-nationalise the railways and

Royal Mail. It should be obvious thatpeople are more likely to give up

their time to help secure afuture Labour Government if

they have been given ameaningful say in the

policies which thatGovernment will

pursue. Therehas been much

d iscuss ions i n c e

CatSmithMP onchangingLabour’spoliticalculture

Jeremy’s election of the party’s position in theEuropean Union referendum. Personally, I believewe should be letting members have their say and Iam extremely optimistic about the positive andinclusive vision of Europe that they will put forwardfor us to campaign for.

The Labour Party has always been part of a widermovement. We need to start demonstrating this bet-ter. As an MP in a marginal seat I know the impor-tance of knocking on doors and talking to voters butpeople are only going to listen if they know we areon their side. Otherwise we will simply be seen aspart of a self-serving political elite. At the last elec-tion I lost count of the number of times I was toldthat all political parties were the same. I know thatnot to be true but we need to look at why that is theimpression we have given.

Sadly all too often in recent times we have stoodaloof from activities taking place outside of the

Westminsterbubble or elec-toral cycle.From publicsector strikesagainst real-term cuts inpay to stu-dents protest-ing againsttuition fees ordisabled peo-ple occupyingParliament tovoice theiranger at theclosure of theIndependentLiving Fund,

Labour’s support has been lukewarm at best.Perhaps most damningly over the past two to threeyears the anti-austerity movement has largely takenplace with Labour sitting on the sidelines. We needto be visible again, on picket lines supporting strik-ing workers, on demonstrations both nationally andlocally, for example fighting alongside communitiesopposing fracking. Some have derided the idea ofLabour being ‘the party of protest’ as if it is some-how an alternative to being in Government. Thereality is that it is only by standing alongside thosefighting this Government that people will see us asa genuine alternative to the Tories. One which isworth voting for.

Thankfully we have elected a leader who getsthis. Jeremy has not only demonstrated himself tobe a committed champion of party members’ rightshe has also been on probably more picket-lines anddemonstrations since his election to Parliament in1983 than any other MP in that time. I firmlybelieve the era of machine politics is over. It’s timeto start being a movement again.

Cat Smith is MP for Lancaster & Fleetwood and shadowminister for Women and Equalities

End of machine politics?

16 CHARTIST Labour Conference Special 2015

WESTMINSTER VIEW

Subscribe to CHARTIST at

Subscribe on line at

www.chartist.org.uk


15conferencespecialfinal-correction.qxp … · 2020-02-27 · practising an entirely new style of...

Documents