New
Living Diary
Index

New  participatory democracy

Taming the Corporations

My Welsh socialism

My New Socialist Settlement

Globalise the left!

Bevan  re-visited

770   22 July 2003   

Mumbles flexes muscle

This may not seem a revolutionary picture.  But it is.  This is the first ever "working" employee of Mumbles Community Council, on which I proudly serve.  Community Councils (or "parish" councils, in England), rarely employ anyone other than a Clerk. 

This week my Council, seeking to improve levels of street cleanliness throughout the town, broke new ground. Our cleaner is a 29-year old Chinese MA student, Zhuhua Fang, who will be working for us during the University vacation.  He is a graduate in Business Studies from Shandong University, and came to us via the Swansea Jobcentre (whose service was top-class).  Fang receives £5 per hour for a 15-hour week, and patrols the streets between 9.00 and 11.00 am, six days a week, including Saturdays and Sundays.

Why is this revolutionary?  Because Community Councils could perfectly well carry out a large number of local environmental control functions.  Mainstream politicians, the salariat, disregard these "local Councils", where no Councillors are paid and statutory powers are very limited indeed. Yet we raise our own taxes, and have to face personal local criticism for unwise public spending - as well as praise for our successes, like the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury.  Every figure above £500 is the subject of intense attention.  And we raise by way of taxes, from our 17,000 local residents, the sum of £65,000 a year, usually.

For example, this week we are also experimenting with a new contract of guarantee, supporting the local bus company First Cymru to run a new "Three Bays Circular" - I took this picture of two Community Councillors, with a public passenger, on the first-ever Three Bays Circular.  Caswell, Langland and Bracelet Bay are all a couple of miles away from the town centre, virtually inaccessible by bus.  We guarantee to the bus company the operating costs of the vehicle (£160 per day), taking credit for all fares received - and the bus runs a circular service, once every hour, to all three Bays.  It was my job to negotiate the support contract with the bus company.  I am convinced that it is at this local level that new ideas most effectively germinate, and can be most quickly implemented.

I say that devolution should empower "local Councils" (parish, town, community) to do much more.  They should be fully responsible for local environmental controls, including planning permission. Thousands upon thousands of our fellow-citizens should be given the opportunity to participate in the governance of their own communities.  We should repatriate to local citizens many of the functions taken away by the larger Councils and by the professional salariat.

• That would be truly revolutionary.

Back to text

771  28 July  2003  

New Left Majority?

Bill Hayes is, I am sure, well-intentioned.  He is the new General Secretary of the Communication Workers Union, and he is uncomfortable with the label "Awkward Squad", which has been hung around his neck by the Meeja  (Do you know what an Awkward Squad really is? I was once a member of an Awkward Squad - check it out).  On the contrary, he claims, these new leaders are part of a "New Left Majority" in the union movement that is determined to mount a systematic challenge against New Labour.

Bill Hayes is open, and straightforward.  He states the key political tenets of the new group, and sets them out in a feature article in The Guardian.

• "In the economic sphere, we challenge the view that competition is by its nature good, while progressive tax-funded public provision is bad.
• In international affairs, we are opposed to Britain playing role of US poodle.
• In social terms, we support education rather than sanctions.
• In industry, we call for more public intervention and accountability, harnessed to more wide-ranging trade union rights.
• These core values and objectives will provide the starting-point for a powerful challenge to New Labour in the coming months."

But will they?  Can they?   I confess I find this Statement insubstantial, a wholly inadequate "brief" for building a new Party position. 

• "In the economic sphere, we challenge the view that competition is by its nature good, while progressive tax-funded public provision is bad."

This is false antithesis.  Nobody is contending that competition is "by nature good", as a primary organising system. That is merely a tilting windmill.   I do contend that self-regulating market mechanisms play a central role in all social and economic organisation, and should be allowed to do as much as they can, minimising Government involvement.  "Government" has a great deal to do, and should minimise its commitments wherever possible, allowing market mechanisms to take the strain. There are many sectors where the vagaries of market provision are not acceptable, and where direct public service deployment is the only appropriate solution - that is an entirely legitimate subject for political debate, on both Left and Right.  Labour must certainly articulate a coherent view of this balance.  But Billy Hayes is wrong to construct, upon this territory, a false antithesis of principle.

• "In international affairs, we are opposed to Britain playing role of US poodle"

Who could disagree?  But Anti-Americanism is not enough.  There is no sign of a coherent "European", pro-Euro philosophy emerging from the New Left Majority.  I certainly wish to see the UK continuing to play a leading international role, principally within Europe and building on European institutions. But will I find that among the new TU leaders?  I doubt it.

• "In social terms, we support education rather than sanctions."

This is more promising, although somewhat opaque.  If it means radical drugs reform, a rejection of mass criminalisation in social matters, a retreat from the authoritarianism of New Labour and in particular of Jack Straw and David Blunkett - then it could prove constructive.  Following the authoritarianism, the illiberal communitarianism of New Labour, there must be a new "liberal" beginning.  But the traditional TU Left does not have a strong human rights record beyond the workplace, and that seems unlikely to develop.

• "In industry, we call for more public intervention and accountability, harnessed to more wide-ranging trade union rights."

Here, the New Left Majority is on its prime ground.  I am also a campaigner for radical company-law changes, strengthening public intervention and the internal mechanisms of accountability.  It is indeed vital that Labour captures and builds upon the perceptions of the TU movement, and weaves them into the fabric of its new politics. The TU leaders have a key role to play in the future of the Party, and nothing should be done to jeopardise that.  But note the caveat, even here: Billy Hayes calls for the improvement of "trade union rights" - not workers' rights generally.  Now, I agree: TU rights should indeed be improved, to facilitate worker-recruitment and improve the effectiveness of collective action (e.g. sympathy strikes should not be penalised, they constitute the legitimate exercise of the right of association).  But 75% of the UK workforce are not members of any union (the percentage is far higher in the market sector) and Government must give priority to strengthening workers' rights generally.  Labour must confront this difference of perspective, and effect a reconciliation.

But overall, this is a limited and inadequate prospectus. Nothing about Human Rights, and their improved enforcement.  Nothing about State pensions (where the Unions have traditionally been weak).  Nothing about the unacceptability of the Means-tested State.  Nothing constructive about foreign affairs, or Europe.  Nothing about devolution, or constitutional reform.  I agree that the future programme of the Labour Party will call for enrichment, greater political depth. But it will need much more than this.

Finally, there is the pretentious use of the title "New Left Majority".  I have no doubt that the new leaders are tapping a real radicalism among their members, and may properly describe themselves as a New Left Majority within the 7m-strong TU movement.  But that's as far as it goes, and should go.

• The Labour Party has got to be bigger than this.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
The originating content of this website is my own work, and subject to my copyright. But on one condition only, I hereby give my consent to its unrestricted reproduction for any purpose: the condition is that its source is subject to proper acknowledgment, giving my name, my assertion of copyright, and the name of this website as its source, namely: www.warrenevans.net - is that a deal?  Roger WE