RESPECT’S ATTITUDE TO A HUNG PARLIAMENT
With the Tories the gap between Labour and the Tories narrowing in the polls, there is every prospect now of a hung parliament. This could make Tower Hamlets the decisive influence over the next government.
Very senior Labour figures have approached George Galloway to find out our attitude towards a potential minority Labour government. This is our response.
If there is a hung parliament and George Galloway and Abjol Miah are returned as Tower Hamlets MPs, Respect will have three minimum conditions on which we will support a Labour-led government:
A MASSIVE COUNCIL HOUSE BUILDING PROGRAMME TO ADDRESS THE HOUSING SCANDAL IN THIS BOROUGH AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY
THE RAPID WITHDRAWAL OF BRITISH TROOPS FROM ALL ILLEGAL AND POINTLESS WARS
THE RADICAL DEMOCRATISATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION WITH A FAIR VOTING SYSTEM, ABOLITION OF THE APPOINTED HOUSE OF LORDS AND CLEANING UP PARLIAMENT – NO MORE SECOND HOMES FIDDLES.
comments were turned off by mistake, now corrected
Comment by Andy Newman — 8 March, 2010 @ 8:59 am
“Very senior Labour figures have approached George Galloway”
who? name names or admit it’s a made up story
Comment by pauline ross — 8 March, 2010 @ 9:24 am
#2
Clearly it would be a breach of confidentiality to “name names”
You can choose to beleive it or not, based upon you personal judgement of my credibility.
Comment by Andy Newman — 8 March, 2010 @ 9:27 am
With a maximum of three MP’s I doubt you would get later two claims.
However in the unlikely event of Respect MPs being asked to support a Labour Gov would n’t it be better to demand a few billion put in to council housing across the U.K.
You might achieve that and it would effect the lives of millions of working class people for the better.
Comment by Martel — 8 March, 2010 @ 9:58 am
“You can choose to beleive it or not, based upon you personal judgement of my credibility”
so do you know the names then?
Comment by pauline ross — 8 March, 2010 @ 10:00 am
Firstly, I doubt Respect will win 3 seats. The pressure to rally to Labour to keep the slash-and-burn Etonian gang out will compel many potential Respect voters to play safe and vote Labour.
Secondly, if there are 3 Respect MPs in a context of a minority Labour govt they will not get the demands you list - or anything close beyond vague rhetorical support. In this context the consequences for Respect could be very negative. On the one hand there will be enormous pressure to compromise to avoid another election that could give the Tories the upper hand. On the other hand compromise will divide and demoralise Respect’s membership and electoral base with the consequence that if a futher election is called for reasons unrelated to Respect’s support for Labour, Respect’s credibility as a principled voice of protest will have been radically dilluted and their support is likely to drain away.
Comment by Michael Fisher — 8 March, 2010 @ 10:16 am
Are they losing it?
Comment by yoghurt currantsy german — 8 March, 2010 @ 10:19 am
Its a fair enough position to take, I’d be pleased to see more than one Respect MP, hopefully cooperating with more than one Green.
In the areas Respect are standing there isn’t going to be a Tory elected, so there is no need to vote Labour to keep them out (utterly depressing thought in most cases)
Comment by ECOLEFTY — 8 March, 2010 @ 10:31 am
Gerry Fitt contributed to bring down a hung parliament.
If a future parliament is in the same quandry, it is only natural that Respect, the Greens and Independents vote will be eagerly vied for
Comment by LarryN — 8 March, 2010 @ 10:52 am
“In the areas Respect are standing there isn’t going to be a Tory elected, so there is no need to vote Labour to keep them out.” True in those areas; but it would depress the overall number of Labour MPs. On saying that, tough: this is what Labour have done to themselves.
Do people think that a Labour minority government (if it happens) will spark a crisis in the Unions?
Comment by sue manchester — 8 March, 2010 @ 11:25 am
It would be a serious mistake for any Respect MP (or Green, or TUSC) to help prop up a minority Labour government, or to participate in an electoral pact with any of the other establishment parties.
Such a government would without doubt inflict severe attacks on our public sector, and in order to do so, would come into direct conflict with workers and their Trade Unions.
Any left party participating in such a government, even as critical allies would rapidly become tarred with the same brush as their neo-liberal partners, in the eyes of the class as a whole.
The only clear principled position to take would be to use every tactic at the party’s disposal to oppose all legislation and budgets that inflict cuts on our precious public services, or further attack the rights of Trade Unionists.
Comment by River — 8 March, 2010 @ 11:31 am
“However in the unlikely event of Respect MPs being asked to support a Labour Gov would n’t it be better to demand a few billion put in to council housing across the U.K.”
But that’s what the article says.
Whether, when and over what to bring down a minority social democratic government and precipitate a fresh election is a highly tactical question.
Comment by Nas — 8 March, 2010 @ 11:50 am
When you say “Very senior Labour figures…” do you mean MPs?
Comment by BarryB — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:04 pm
Hey Pauline Ross, just one question.
Are you on the paid staff of the Labour Party, by any slight chance?
Comment by Strategist — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:10 pm
goodness how vivid the imaginations of respect members run; you are suffering the same sort of delusions as Nick Clegg that you will be in a position to determine the course of the next government via the votes of your mps, or that you will be Kingmakes and have a veto on the next prime minister.
Not only is it totally delusional, but it is so far away from any concept of socialism that I’m sure even ex-swp who massage Galloway’s fantasies must shudder at the thought.
Comment by pauline ross — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:35 pm
“Whether, when and over what to bring down a minority social democratic government and precipitate a fresh election is a highly tactical question.”
Firstly Labour can no longer be reasonably be described as a ’social democratic’ party. It’s a party that has openly ruled in the interests of the corporations, bankers and millionaires since it was elected - thoroughly neo-liberal and anti-working class.
Secondly, I’ve nothing against being ‘tactical’, but they need to be tactics that working class people can understand. A left party in parliament should never place itself in a position where workers can reasonably ask “Why are you propping up a government that is doing this to us?” (A question which today many civil servants will be asking of their ‘left’ labour MPs about the attacks on their redundancy payments, a clear attempt to make it easier to sack them).
A small left party in parliament is laying the foundations for the future - by taking a clear principled line over defence of our public services, trade unionism and against imperialism, it will shine out compared to the greed and corruption of the 3 main parties and become far more effective at preventing the government (whatever it’s hue) from attacking the working class than any miserable compromise coalition.
Comment by River — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:49 pm
#15 I withdraw my question at #14.
Are you a nutter, by any slight chance?
(You have gone up in my estimation, by the way - Labour HQ staff are a pretty low form of human life.)
Comment by Strategist — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:50 pm
#15 methinks, it is you that will be doing the shudering.
Comment by LarryN — 8 March, 2010 @ 12:50 pm
Well, we disagree, River, about the nature of the Labour Party. So our tactics will necessarily differ. I don’t think you will find many civil servants today welcoming a Tory victory, no matter how much they loathe what the Labour Party is doing to them. Sure there are all sorts of demands that can be placed on a minority government. But bringing it down - ie voting with the right in a no confidence motion - is something that requires careful thought, not moralistic absolutes.
Comment by Nas — 8 March, 2010 @ 1:47 pm
‘Secondly, I’ve nothing against being ‘tactical’, but they need to be tactics that working class people can understand.’
Patronising git.
Comment by Martel — 8 March, 2010 @ 2:29 pm
I’m not being patronising Martel, I number myself among the working class, consider myself reasonably bright, but find it pretty hard to understand some the strange positions, uncomfortable compromises and unholy alliances many ‘lefts’ have got themselves into in the past in the name of being ‘tactical’.
With the whole of the bourgeois press against us, it’s important our positions are simple and clear, if we do get representatives in parliament, then their role cannot be to horse-trade with the neoliberals in smokefree rooms, but to speak openly and clearly over their heads and directly to our class.
Comment by River — 8 March, 2010 @ 2:39 pm
River: it is not difficult. First, Respect will not join a government that doesn’t promise to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan etc, that doesn’t pledge massive public spending on housing and doesn’t demolish some of the anti-democratic structures of the British state. That means it will not be joining any government as revolution is far more likely than any of those things happening.
Second, Respect will never participate in any vote of no confidence designed to bring down a labour government under any currently foreseeable circumstances.
Third, Respect will take a position on government proposed legislation, budgets, policies etc on a case by case basis using the criteria as to whether what is being put forward is in the interests of its constituents and the working class as a whole. Needless to say a government bent on assaulting the working class under circumstances where Respect holds the decisive votes is not going to get much passed. Should a labour government prove unable to function under such circumstances then Resect no doubt will demand that it brings forward pro-working class policies or goes back to the country with a radical socialist manifesto which will gain it the proper majority it needs. If it does not do so but persists with a programme of vicious public spending cuts, job destruction and welfare cuts then Respect and the rest of the left will certainly be in a strong position to win many more seats than the three it currently has a serious chance in.
I would love to see that third criteria above include a demand for a sovereign English parliament as well as the abolition of the Lords and full employment with the housing section.
Comment by David Ellis — 8 March, 2010 @ 3:00 pm
That looks like a perfectly clear and principled position to take David, shame the original post was not so clear. It obviously isn’t clear to everyone as it is to you that there is no chance of Respect joining a government, otherwise these unnamed people would not have approached Galloway in the first place.
Comment by River — 8 March, 2010 @ 3:06 pm
“It obviously isn’t clear to everyone as it is to you that there is no chance of Respect joining a government, otherwise these unnamed people would not have approached Galloway in the first place.”
You don’t have to have any intention of joining a government to be asked what your posture would after an election in relation to the other parties.
I think you’re splitting hairs, River.
Comment by Nas — 8 March, 2010 @ 3:14 pm
Doesn’t this whole discussion depend on a) Respect getting 3 MPs, b) Labour or Labour-and-whoever-is-prepared-to-bloc-with-Labour getting one or 2 seats less than an overall majority and c) everyone else in parliament preferring a Conservative minority administration? I’m not a betting man, but if I went into Ladbrokes I’d expect to be offered pretty long odds on such a scenario.
Comment by Francis King — 8 March, 2010 @ 3:36 pm
Francis, thanks to the ineptitude of Cameron and the Tories, who are stood in front of an open goal with the current Labour Party, the chances of a hung parliament, while still unlikely, are increasing in likelihood every day, so this debate is not as idle as it might be.
How parties will behave in a hung parliament scenario is something voters would do well to take into consideration before casting their ballot, and it is a question that could emerge again and again for the left in the future - we’re looking at a future of weak governments with small or non-existent majorities implementing ever more aggressive cuts while faced with growing working class anger.
Nas, I’m not splitting hairs, I’m trying to get some clarity, and thanks to David’s clearly written post, this is now forthcoming.
David’s second point about there being no foreseeable circumstances under which Respect would no-confidence a minority Labour government is, I feel, a little too strong on the ‘Never’, £12 billion of public spending cuts seems ample reason to me to no-confidence any of the 3 establishment parties, as would joining a new imperialist adventure in the Middle East, along with plenty of other things the current Labour party is quite capable of inflicting on workers or the planet without breaking a sweat.
Comment by River — 8 March, 2010 @ 3:58 pm
If you can’t name names, you can use google. As I pointed out over on HP, if they’re going to dismiss the claims here as “bizarre”, they’d have to first explain the background to this twit, eh, I mean, tweet.
d.z.bodenberg
8 March 2010, 6:05 pm
Before I’d decide whether the claims are “bizarre” or not, I’d want to know the background to this:
http://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/9691214856
@georgegalloway Could do with a chat. What the best way to get you these days? If you follow me, we can direct message.
tom_watson 10:52 AM Feb 26th via web in reply to georgegalloway
Comment by d.z. bodenberg — 8 March, 2010 @ 6:17 pm
I think it’s unfortunate, to say the least, that the article doesn’t mention Salma Yaqoob’s candidacy for Respect (on International Women’s Day too!).
But it also contains the seed of another politial error, since she appears to be enjoying great success in pursuing a campaign agaisnt the programmeof cuts announced by Birmingham City Council.
http://www.salmayaqoob.com/
This is the beginnings of a more rounded and attractive programme than simply a call for public housing, welcome as that would be. In effect, a large programme of investment, including but not confided to housing, is counterposed to the cuts agenda. Now, investment not cuts, British troop withdrawal from foreign occupations, greater democracy and accountability, save money by abolishing Trident and ID cards, free education and an end to PFI and privatisations. That might be some of the headings for any programme of support for Labour.
Comment by ahmed — 8 March, 2010 @ 6:21 pm
It’s a local Tower Hamlets press release, Ahmed, explaining to Tower Hamlets voters their potentially very significant role in national politics. That’s the only reason it does not mention Birmingham, where as you rightly say we are in a very good position.
Comment by Nas — 8 March, 2010 @ 6:47 pm
It’s a local TH press release, Ahmed. That’s the only reason it does not mention Birmingham, where as you rightly say we are in a strong position.
Comment by Nas — 8 March, 2010 @ 6:47 pm
If Respect get MPs elected I don’t think a Labour or Conservative minority Government should be supported. There is no point propping up neo-liberal parties either of blue or rose.
Respect MPs should work on developing a ‘progressive caucus’ with Liberal Democrat, Green, Nationalist and Independent MPs and building links with left Labour MPs encouraging them to split and join the ‘progressive caucus’.
Comment by Pero — 8 March, 2010 @ 7:38 pm
Why does a phrase about bald men and combs come to mind?
Face it, Bethnal Green is the only nailed on Labour gain in May; in Poplar the intervention of the gorgeous fellow, ironically, will do little but drive Tory voters, predominantly in the Isle of Dogs and the surrounding area, into Fitzpatrick’s arms “to keep him out”. (Ironic that the punters fear the indefatigable one more than a Tory bank manager) In Sparkbrook their strength exists in one ward alone out of the four.
“Very senior Labour figures” realise this, and they also realise GG is beyond the pale, don’t they?
And anyway, if Respect were in a position to prop a minority Labour Government up, you do realise it would be based on their MPs bothering to turn up to support it in the House of Commons….?
Comment by Parasite — 8 March, 2010 @ 11:25 pm
Hi Parasite- your bus will be along soon to take you back to 2005, the last time this nonsense was tried by you lot.
Comment by tony collins — 9 March, 2010 @ 12:00 am
George has always been qyite open about his ambition to be PM, this could be as close as he gets.
Comment by eamonn wright — 9 March, 2010 @ 12:10 am
Jimmy Unfitz can’t decide whether to call on Tories to vote for him to stop Galloway, or Respect voters to back him to stop the Tories. He knows there’s no positive vote for him and he could well come a dismal third.
As for Salma, she only needs a small swing vote to win, and no one had heard of her five years ago. Bethnal Green - does anyone imagine the invisible Labour candidate can poll as well as the high profile Oona King?
These will be tight races. Only blusterers claim to know the results.
Comment by Nas — 9 March, 2010 @ 12:13 am
25 Francis: But if the fear of Respect gains or their own principles led to 50, 60, 70 left labour MPs and say Plaid and even SNP MPs adopoting the same approach it might not be such an outlandish scenario. We will see how they behave. So as was said above it is good to think about these things in advance. But as Nas says things are too tight to call as to whether Respect will get its 3 MPs or none and so there must be a huge effort from the supporters to match that already being made by the excellent candidates from here on in to ensure that it does.
26 River: No foreseeable circumstances at the moment where Respect MPs would no-confidence a Labour Government. But I didn’t say never. Perhaps if opinion polls suddenly showed Respect on 40%, The Tories on 37 and New Labour disappearing up its own fundament then things would be different. The things you envisage a new Brown government doing I too can envisage but in a situation where it is a minority government hopefully Respect votes would stop them doing those things through `democratic’ channels and if they proceed `undemocratically’ or underhandedly or covertly all that will be further grist to Respect and the left’s mill. But at the moment I think workers thinking of voting Respect need to be assured that Respect MPs would not think of bringing down a Labour government if it meant letting in the hated Tories. They would simply demand that the Labour government rules first in the interest of the working class and its constituents but also takes full account of the ruiniation facing the middle classes, small businesses and farmers in its policies. They will vote for their proposals, legislation, budgets when they do and against them when they don’t. After that Respect should be preparing for a new election with the prospect of getting a serious number of MPs elected. So join up now if you fancy being one of them or helping that to happen.
Comment by David Ellis — 9 March, 2010 @ 1:57 pm
“I didn’t say never”.
“Respect will never participate in any vote of no confidence designed to bring down a labour government under any currently foreseeable circumstances”
“The things you envisage a new Brown government doing I too can envisage”
So you did say an at least qualified “never”, and you can forsee some of those unforseeable circumstances…
I’m hoping I get a chance to vote TUSC in the next election, and I’d like to see TUSC and Respect working more closely together subsequently. If either grouping get MPs elected, and there is a hung parliament or a tiny majority, there will be a lot of pressure on those MPs to come into unprincipled coalitions in return for fictional concessions, plenty of opportunities to build a new left outside Labour, and numerous potential pitfalls.
Let’s hope all left candidates are well prepared and strong enough to hold the line well for working class people.
Comment by River — 9 March, 2010 @ 3:14 pm
#32 “In Sparkbrook their strength exists in one ward alone out of the four.”
You are talking rubbish. Firstly, Sparkbrook is a ward not a constituency. Secondly, the Constituency is called Hall Green. Thirdly, Respect has considerable strength in TWO of the four wards - Sparkbrook, where Salma Yaqoob scored nearly 50% four years ago to first get elected and since then her personal stock has risen considerably and she could get a vote even higher; and Springfield, where Salma Iqbal scored 25% for Respect in 2008. These two wards are the largest in the constituency with a majority of electors. Both have a majority muslim electorate. Additionally Respect has scored over 10% in the past in a third ward - Moseley and Kings Heath (Respect has never stood in the fourth ward Hall Green itself so it is an unknown quantity).
Undoubtably Birmingham readers can update us more on how the campaign is going but the baseline in a majority of the constituency is very strong.
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 9 March, 2010 @ 5:36 pm
In March 1979, Frank Maguire Independent Republican MP for Fermanagh and South Tyrone attended the no confidence debate on the Labour Government to “abstain in person”. Labour MPs tried to waylay him out of the chamber in the bar in to voting for them, but his wife, who was in the chamber listening to the debate came to find him to say that there was no way he should vote to defend the Labour Government after its rotten record on Ireland, particularly Roy Mason who backed the unionists on every issue. Labour also attacked Maguire for his infrequent attendance - he was not an abstentionist like Sinn Fein but argued he had better things to do to represent his strongly republican constituency than turn up to meaningless debates in the House of Commons. Gerry Fitt also abstained saying that Mason’s indefensible record as Northern Ireland secretary meant that he was not prepared to vote against the no confidence motion. Both MPs abstained rather than vote for the Tories, and the Government lost by just one vote.
This episode does show the power of MPs in a hung parliament situation. Had the Labour government not alienated the Irish republican and nationalist movement so much, it would have won the no confidence debate and may have changed the course of the subsequent general election.
No one could deny that the republican and nationalist MPs did not make crystal clear to the Labour Party and although they generally supported Labour in parliament, refused to be tied to it when it broke from fundamental issues they took up.
POSTSCRIPT: At the General Election in May 1979, both Fitt and Maguire were easily returned to parliament, and an unknown “Troops Out of Ireland” campaigner, backed by Socialist Unity Mark 1, got a respectable by the standards of the times 638 votes against Roy Mason. Maguire died two years later in 1981 and of course the subsequent by-election was won by Bobby Sands, republican prisoner on hunger strike who died after election, and subsequently the seat was won by his agent, Owen Carron.
Comment by Prinkipo Exile — 9 March, 2010 @ 5:59 pm