Factions give Iemma an easy ride

Despite attempts to present the Iemma-Costa leadership as a "new direction" for NSW, the musty smell of the Carr years lingers. Marcus Strom reports from the NSW ALP state conference.

Most old hands at the NSW ALP state conference over the June long weekend reckoned it was a pretty tame affair as these things go. And that's just how the factional chiefs wanted it. The sparring warriors of the Labor tribe buried or blurred their differences to give Morris Iemma a smooth ride nine months out from a state election and embraced a federal leader that the NSW Right had been undermining for months.

An invigorated Kim Beazley killed two birds with one stone. By committing a federal Labor government to abolish Australian Workplace Agreements, Beazley put clear blue water between himself and the federal government while simultaneously giving the NSW Right a gentle smack in the mouth.

In the often strange world of ALP factions, it is the NSW Left of Anthony Albanese that has shored up Kim Beazley's position as leader. The NSW Right is known to prefer shadow foreign affairs minister Kevin Rudd, with perhaps a wandering eye on the Napoleonic figure of AWU leader Bill Shorten. The mainstream press has widely reported John Robertson's distaste for Beazley as party leader. Beazley's announcement took the conference by surprise and Robertson, Unions NSW secretary, was reported as saying, "If yesterday's purpose was to secure his job, it served him well." (Sydney Morning Herald, June 13).

Of course there was political gamesmanship in Beazley's announcement. Yes, it is aimed to stabilise the Labor factions behind him in the run up to the election. However it shows something deeper about the Labor party. Prime minister John Howard, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Peter Hendy and a cast of bilious business leaders lined up to declare that Beazley had "caved in to the unions" or that Beazley was being "bullied".

They have a point. Despite its pro-capitalist program, the ALP remains organisationally entwined with the unions. Some far-left groups such as Steve Jolly's Melbourne-based Socialist Party dismiss this fact and say there is no fundamental difference between the ALP and the Liberal Party. The Democratic Socialist Party describes the ALP as a "capitalist party", which, while true to some extent, is not the whole story.

Beazley's announcement on AWAs does not turn him into a class warrior, however. The pro-capitalist ALP leadership sees its role as one that mediates between capital and labour in the interests of class harmony and the "national interest". But the relationship of the labour movement to the Labor Party shows there is a persistent contradiction in the heart of Laborism. It is this contradiction with which Marxists seek to engage, unravel and resolve in the interests of the working class and genuine socialism.

The rhetoric of union leaders and ALP parliamentarians for an "independent umpire" to oversee the implementation of awards and enterprise agreements is dangerous. The Industrial Relations Commission is meant to be such an 'independent' umpire. Marxists know that this is nonsense. The capitalist state is incapable of being independent. This myth is at the heart of traditional social democracy and explains why as an ideology it is ultimately useless for the working class. And while the agencies of the state and its statutory authorities are open to pressure from class action, our action cannot be subordinated to the needs of such bodies. If Beazley is elected prime minister, the working class cannot rest, it must redouble efforts to place itself at the heart of political life in Australia.

Party democracy and preselection

Dozens of ALP activists from the Hunter region attended conference waving placards "Newcastle demands rank-and-file preselection". The sitting member for Newcastle, the left's Bryce Gaudry, is tipped to be replaced by the independent mayor John Tate. I don't know much about Tate, but the last time the ALP recruited an independent lord mayor we ended up with Frank Sartor as planning minster. Nuff said.

The Labor machine is fundamentally about getting elected and running government. Democracy rarely has much to do with this. While the working class and the unions are able to pressure the ALP's platform, what it stands for usually runs a poor second to actually winning. Hence focus groups and polling take precedent over principle and politics. I'll bet my giddy aunt that Beazley's conversion on the road to Damascus over AWAs was thoroughly polled and "focus-grouped".

This parlous state of affairs was shown up at state conference. There was a dozen or so motions calling for rank-and-file selection of candidates. This is obviously an issue of concern to ALP activists. Geoff Drechsler's contribution to Labor Tribune shows that the heavy-handed intervention of head office to parachute in candidates alienates workers from the Labor Party. And while Drechsler's solution to this is schematic rather than political, there is clearly a groundswell of disenchantment with bureaucratic management of candidates.

Delegates defeated a motion from the Newcastle state electoral council, 390 in favour and 477 against. It says: "Conference vehemently opposes any proposed N40 selection of any candidate for the state electorate of Newcastle and reaffirms its total support for the standing member and a rank-and-file preselection." Rule N40 of the NSW ALP allows for the suspension of selection ballots, the installation of a central panel and the effective removal of rank-and-file control.

At conference Gaudry said that Morris Iemma needs "committed, hard-working ALP members [of parliament] supported by the rank and file". However Karl Bitar, the rightwing's assistant secretary accused the left of hypocrisy because it had supported the installation of Peter Garret in Kingsford-Smith. Bitar couldn't but help himself to a bit of red-baiting either, accusing Gaudry of preferring he be succeeded by Tim Crackenthorpe. Claiming that Crackenthorpe had recently visited Cuba, Bitar said he "learnt the pure form of communism at the hands of Fidel Castro". If only it was so.

Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities

The so-called Socialist Left faction of the ALP had its list of hobbyhorse issues to take to conference. Rather than stand an alternative platform for government that is actually socialist, the comrades instead chose an all-together more timid approach.

And there was nothing more timid over the weekend than the debate about a Charter for Rights and Responsibilities. Or rather, it was a debate about holding a discussion about maybe NSW introducing such a charter. And speakers from the left bent over backwards to assure delegates that any such charter would be a parliamentary bill, not a campaign for constitutional change, heaven forbid!

A proposed charter is to be modelled on Victoria's Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act. This contains such matters as freedom from forced work, freedom of movement, freedom of thought, conscience, religion, belief, expression and association. It puts in law the right to join a trade union. However it is quiet on any rights once you're in a trade union - the right to withdraw labour is nowhere to be seen in this act or in the NewMatilda sponsored Human Rights bill for federal parliament. After all, the rights to property are also protected in the charter.

Speaking in favour of the motion, Sydney deputy lord mayor Verity Firth warned delegates that "ALP is not going to be in power forever in NSW ... and what legacy will we leave workers?" She went on to claim that many rights and liberties, including the right to join a union, are enshrined in Victoria.

Now I don't know about you, but "enshrined" implies something a little more permanent than that of a parliamentary majority. A conservative government in Victoria could easily repeal the act, as could any subsequent Liberal-National government in NSW.

Further, the Victorian act contains this killer clause: "Parliament may expressly declare in an act that that act or a provision of that act … has effect despite being incompatible with one or more of the human rights or despite anything else set out in this charter." S. 31 (1) Such an act is aimed at making the liberal left feel good about itself. It is not designed to empower working people.

The whole point about "enshrining" human rights is to put them beyond the vagaries of parliamentary majorities. Labor Tribune supports a constitutional bill of rights as part of a republican constitution. In order to achieve this we cannot tinker with the current constitutional settlement - we must abolish the monarchial constitution through the mass action of the working class, including any pressure through parliament we can muster.

Bernie Smith of the SDA retail union opposed the motion. He claimed that our political culture is enough to protect such rights and that legislative measures on particular issues is all that is required. He said that Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Mao's China and Stalin's USSR all had bills of rights and they were dictatorships.

NSW attorney-general Bob Debus countered saying that we need statute and culture and said that we have enjoyed such rights 'since time immemorial'. While this was no doubt a mere rhetorical flourish, it exposes a weakness in the "Socialist" Left's thinking on this matter. Rights are not from 'time immemorial', they are concrete; they are fought for, won and defended through class struggle. The motion passed on the voices with the left gaining the backing of most of industrial right.

As it stands it is a weak "feel-good" motion and is the sort of "trendy" issue that the conservatives so love to wedge Labor on. Human rights need to be real not merely a charter from the chattering classes that can be snatched away by the next rightwing government. They need to be constitutionally enshrined and, most importantly, exercised by a militant working class movement.

International relations committee

NSW Labor has policy opposed to all mandatory detention of asylum seekers. That is a good thing. It is something worth defending. Of course, it is not a consistently democratic and internationalist position. Marxists fight for the right of all people to free movement. In a globalised world economy it is an obscene madness that a plastic spoon made in China, or a Nike shoe made in Indonesia, has more rights to travel the world than the person who made it.

At the past two state conferences, Labor for Refugees has had to fight a rearguard action to stop the NSW Right overturning policy on asylum seekers and refugees. And in that fight we have found a champion in John Robertson, secretary of Unions NSW. Again, that is a good thing and it is an alliance worth defending.

Once again the international relations committee report threatened NSW policy on this issue. And in tune with this whole conference a nice little fudge was sorted out.

Initially John Robertson and the L4R convenors favoured the whole item falling off the agenda. This is how the policy was saved last year. But shadow immigration minister Tony Burke wanted his shot at grandstanding at the Town Hall podium. Comrade Burke is a very ambitious man.

So a deal was done. Daney Faddoul and Daniel Mookhey from Labor 4 Refugees met with Meredith Burgmann, John Robertson and Tony Burke to sort this out.

Tony Burke got his wish to address conference regarding his review of temporary protection visas. L4R got its wish to re-emphasise current state policy on this, but not in such a way as to bind Burke to it, but merely as one submission to the review process. Further Burke condemned the Howard government's odious second Pacific solution to send offshore all "unauthorised" asylum seekers for processing. Conference also instructed the state government to allow Medicare access to all non-residents on TPVs. This final point is an important win for the refugee advocacy movement.

In return, the right allowed through the Left's motion on West Papua, which was no great concession given that the motion falls short of calling for self-determination for West Papua. The motion calling for Australian troops to withdraw from Iraq also passed. However, this calls for "orderly withdrawal" rather than a better formulation from the Illawara regional assembly for "immediate withdrawal".

Unfortunately it did not call for Australia to withdraw from Afghanistan, it just opposes further deployment. So that bloody occupation is all right then.

Opposition to the Howard government's anti-terror laws was strong throughout branches. Party members are particularly angry at the sedition and detention-without-charge aspects of these laws. One motion, from Banks FEC, went so far as to call on Beazley to resign as leader if he couldn't oppose these anti-democratic laws.

Not surprisingly, these motions fell, largely along factional lines.

Nuclear power

The other classic fudge at conference came courtesy of Anthony Albanese and the Australian Workers Union. Albanese has been admirably carrying the flag for the anti-nuclear campaigners. The neanderthal wing of the ALP is in danger of allowing Howard to drag Labor into a diversionary debate on uranium and nuclear power. All it sees is jobs and export earnings. As one rightwinger said to me at a branch meeting: "Morality has nothing to do with the national interest." Well, he was right, but for all the wrong reasons. Marxist morality is concrete and is universal for all humanity. The national interest is nothing but short hand for the interests of the Australian capitalist class. Bill Shorten, the man who scabbed on the Pilbara mineworkers to do a deal with Rio Tinto, and the AWU he leads is at the forefront of seeking to overturn current ALP policy, which opposes new uranium mines. That policy is itself a compromise born in the 1980s.

The AWU had a motion to conference: "Conference calls upon the state government to undertake an investigation into the use of nuclear technology in the provision of energy as a supplement to existing sources in meeting the growing energy demands of NSW." The administration committee recommended support for this in the conference papers.

Albanese's motion on Saturday afternoon in the environment section was in opposition to nuclear power. The AWU not only withdrew its motion, but it seconded Albanese's opposition to nuclear power. You may think this odd, but in the short-term electoral interests of the ALP, the factions agreed to defer the debate to national conference. It was in the speeches of the mover and seconder where the differences emerged. Albanese expanded on his opposition to nuclear power, mentioning dangers posed by the "entire nuclear cycle". This is in opposition to those in the ALP who not only wish to see uranium mining expanded but want uranium enrichment and even entertain fantasies of nuclear energy.

Mick Madden, NSW president of the AWU, spoke in favour of Albanese's motion, but made clear that this did not equate to any opposition to expanded uranium mining.

The motion passed unanimously. The debate was mere shadow boxing and a factional deal had meant the fight on uranium mining was put off to national conference next year.

Procurement

The NSW government has been saying some decent things about WorkChoices. It has helped bankroll the High Court challenge to the legislation. It has moved to protect public servants by making them Crown employees. Fair enough as far as it goes. However, unions want more leverage out of Labor in government in NSW. In the lead-up to conference, John Della Bosca - the uber-minister for commerce, finance and industrial relations - had said that any moves to force government to only procure goods and services from worker-friendly employers would be illegal.

Unions NSW moved to have government procure goods and services from companies that respected awards, industrial agreements and occupational health and safety issues. The government tried to wriggle out of this, but it saw the writing on the wall - or rather, saw it didn't have the numbers.

Della Bosca made a statement at conference saying he would draw up guidelines for consideration to implement the decision. Unions must ensure that the motion is carried out in spirit and letter.

Conclusion

So there you have it. Another exciting weekend in the life of the Labor Party. Deals done, motions passed and the rank-and-file told to leave the stage for another year. The meeting was interesting for what was left off the agenda: local government. The airing of this report and its associated amendments would have been embarrassing for a state Labor government that has accepted donations from developers at a time when planning issues are so hot. The report raised concerns about political donations and how this impacts local government, but withdrawing planning powers from councils doesn't remove the temptations and possibilities of petty corruption, rather it allows for the possibility of it being completely professionalised, sanitised and corporatised.

A motion calling for all ministers to be banned for two years from taking jobs in private enterprise should have been heard and should have been passed.

Despite attempts to present the Iemma-Costa leadership as a "new direction" for NSW, the musty smell of the Carr years lingers.


Comments

Says:

Last check to make certain it is OK...

Thought of using Bob's latest rant as a testing ground - poor bugger could probably break anything.


8/20/2006 5:33:41 AM

Says:

Test Comment - hopefuly this means that the system can take rather long comments.
Will clean up when it all works ok..
Mike

8/20/2006 5:24:44 AM

Says:

Test Comment

Something is not quite right in here but i am not certain what it can be - probably getting into the DB OK - maybe the postback event is shafted?

Who knows



8/20/2006 12:21:29 AM

Says:

On a quiet sector of a quiet front:
a momentous NSW Labor Party conference


The courageous English communist poet John Cornford, who had been moving away from Stalinism, sent his companion Margot Heinemann a moving poem from the Spanish Civil War, which began: “On a quiet sector of a quiet front”, and a few weeks later he was killed in battle.

The NSW Labor Party conference, held over two days on the Queens Birthday long weekend was a bit like Cornford's poem. I've attended every NSW Labor Party conference, the whole 40 of them, since 1954, many times as a delegate and for many years now running a bookstall of labour movement books in the foyer of the impressive Sydney Town Hall auditorium.

This was possibly the quietest conference I have ever attended. Many of these events have been far more boisterous than this one, with demonstrations outside on the Town Hall steps and protests in the gallery directed at the 900 delegates on the floor of the conference.

This conference was not like that, at all. It was all business. It's the state conference before the coming state and federal elections, so there probably won't be another one for two years.

Even at the big, turbulent conferences there are usually two events: the one on the floor, in the gallery and on the steps; and the linked event under the stage and in the caucus rooms on the other side of the corridors, where pressure is exerted and deals are made.

In the relatively quiet, defensive atmosphere facing the labour movement, the overt agitation was much reduced, but the pressure and deal-making under the stage and in the caucus rooms was intense indeed, reflecting the pressure from the whole trade union movement, which is under the hammer from the Howard Government and the ruling class.

Industrial relations was the burning issue at the conference by a country mile, and linked to that was the preoccupation of everyone in the labour movement with the re-election of a Labor government at state level and the election of a federal Labor government. Election of both governments is seen as necessary to defeat the Howard Government's attacks on the labour movement.

At the start of the conference Unions NSW secretary John Robertson drew a line in the sand, clearly indicating that the whole of the labour movement expected Kim Beazley to commit to the abolition of Australian Workplace Agreements when a Labor government is elected.

AWAs, so-called, are clearly the preferred ruling class mechanism for rewarding its very privileged servants, such as chief executives and other senior managers, and using ruthless government power to drive down the wages and conditions of most of the rest of society.

When Beazley addressed the conference, he vigorously adopted the trade union position on AWAs. In a remarkable speech, some of which may well have been written by Bob Ellis (it was full of elegant and effective Ellisisms) Beazley pledged his future Labor government to the abolition of AWAs.

This declaration electrified the conference and Beazley received a standing ovation. Subsequently this pledge, which comes down sharply on the side of the working class and the trade unions and a necessary collective bargaining process, has infuriated the whole of the ruling class.

Both stables in the print media, the ultra-reactionary News Limited and the ostensibly liberal Fairfax chain, are beside themselves with fury. Labor leaders are not supposed, according to the rules laid down by the ruling class, to display this kind of ticker in defence of the interests of the base of the labour movement.

On the second day of the conference, the Sunday afternoon, the report of the industrial committee, which always rivets the attention of the conference, prompted several hours of enthusiastic and often militiant debate and discussion that went well over time. There were 26 amendments, most of which were accepted.

This discussion was interrupted by the lights going down in the auditorium to show the new series of ACTU advertisements against Howard's industrial proposals, which feature individual workers who've been disadvantaged by the changes. These ads are very effective, and were greeted by great applause from the conference.

As Michael Berrell, who I don't always agree with, said on the Green Left list, both federal and state elections will clearly be fought on industrial relations, and the basis has been laid for a substantial mobilisation of Labor, the trade unions and the Greens.

Iemma's speech: the unions and the Iemma Government

NSW Premier Morris Iemma's speech to conference was workmanlike. He announced a number of economic initiatives, spoke at length attacking the federal government's workplace changes, and proudly asserted the state government's role in appealing against the Howard industrial laws in the High Court and passing legislation to protect state employees from the federal legislation.

The response of the delegates was enthusiastic, but several trade union delegates strongly challenged the Iemma Government over disputes their unions were having with government bodies, and matters such as so-called public-private partnerships.

Fairly typical was the speech of Nick Lewocki, the moderate but industrially conscientious secretary of the public transport union. His union is in ongoing conflict with Railcorp and the State Transit Authority, and has been involved in industrial action in the past few weeks. It's quite clear that the unions want the Iemma Government re-elected for broad political reasons, but they are unlikely to modify their increasing conflict with the state government on major industrial questions.

Therein lies the contradiction embodied in state Labor governments adopting fiscal policies that conflict with union interests. By and large, however, the unions are willing to give Iemma a go and they hope that the Iemma Government will adopt less pro-business economic and industrial practices and in due course the unions may use their industrial muscle to achieve this.

The Greens and industrial relations

Pressure from the Greens on social justice and environmental questions is now an important factor in NSW politics, as the Greens have proved capable of mounting serious electoral challenges in some inner-city seats.

This pressure now extends to industrial relations, as the conflict over the Howard industrial laws, and the beginnings of revival in the labour movement, has begun to affect the Greens. The national organisation of the Greens has been a bit divided about industrial relations. While no one in the Greens supports Howard's laws, more conservative Greens in some states regard industrial relations as a Labor issue.

The serious left wing in the Greens, spearheaded by the NSW and WA branches, have taken up industrial relations with enthusiasm, however.

The NSW Greens industrial committee had a very successful forum on industrial relations addressed by about eight union leaders and a number of Greens a week or so ago. It was attended by about 100 people.

Veteran unionist and environmentalist Jack Mundey and Greens MP Lee Rhianon made rousing speeches in favour of a careful and deliberate electoral united front in the coming elections between all progressive parties, including the Greens and the Labor Party.

At the end of the meeting this was embodied in a resolution carried almost unanimously, with a couple of dissenters.

Other issues at the Labor conference

At the Labor Party conference, other issues of importance included a left proposal for the state government to legislate for basic democratic rights. This is a particularly important proposal in the current climate of hysteria about terrorism.

This was strongly opposed by state government minister John Della Bosca and others in the NSW Government, but it was supported by a substantial section of the unions associated with the right, as well as the left, and was carried by the conference. Despite Norm Dixon's recent dopey post on the Green Left list about the proposal being a Clayton's bill of rights, it's an important proposal. If passed by the NSW parliament it could have more legal weight than any constitution.

Obviously it will take a big struggle to get the NSW Labor Government to do anything about this, but Dixon's throwaway remarks underline how far removed the leaders of some socialist sects are from the real political world.

Another important issue was the continuing battle over refugee policy. The federal shadow minister for  immigration, Tony Burke, has been taking a good stand on many aspects of the refugee question. For example, he has pledged that Labor will end the Pacific solution and temporary protection visas.

A curious position developed in the run up to conference in discussions within Labor for Refugees. A left sub-faction that has a slight majority in the left as a whole was blowing smoke, asserting that there was strong pressure from the right to modify the position adopted in 2002 by the NSW conference, which was well to the left of federal Labor policy on refugees.

In the event, an arrangement was negotiated by Burke with the left leadership that he would support the left's resolutions on Iraq and West Papua if the left would support his review of TPVs and bridging visa arrangements. Labor for Refugees was asked by Burke to draft an amendment to the international policy committee report.

Complexity developed when the proposed amendment appeared ambiguous as to whether the 2002 position would stand as NSW policy while the review was taking place, or would be replaced by the recommendation put to conference by the Labor foreign affairs committee, which was to the right of the 2002 position.

The ambiguity remained in the proposed amendment much too long for the liking of a close friend of mine who is an activist in Labor for Refugees. To resolve the problem my friend approached a senior person on the right who has a civilised position on refugees, and he said he hadn't heard about the matter and he would negotiate with Tony Burke. After some discussion, Burke proved amenable to the 2002 policy remaining in place while the review was conducted. The amendment was eventually rewritten in that spirit.

During this process there was a lot of rather tick-tacking on mobile phones by the left leadership, and it would be interesting to know from which politicians' offices the pressure on the left leadership was coming. The left leadership is well known to be rather close to Kim Beazley's office.

If this account of the events is unduly complicated I apologise, but the circumstances were complex and deserve to be described.

Tony Burke himself, while obviously an ambitious young politician of the Catholic right, who holds positions on some questions, such as abortion, that few socialists would agree with, is nevertheless very humane on the question of refugees. He has proved open to argument and proposals from Labor for Refugees.

He's clearly a bloke in whom his natural political ambition is tempered by humanity and conscience and he's the right bloke for the job he has in the current climate. He serves up opposition to the xenophobes of the Howard Government in a calm and deliberate way and his public persona on these questions is very effective.

The conference carried unanimously a proposition by Meredith Burgman emphasising the rights of the people of West Papua. The resolution on Iraq, however, was weaker and embodied the rather ambiguous and cumbersome proposition for an immediate phased withdrawal of Australian troops.

Another interesting development that was apparent at the conference was a certain evolution of the right-wing majority in Young Labor in its overall political outlook.

For many years the newspapers produced for conference by the right majority in Young Labor have been dominated by crude factionalism and anti-leftism. This all vanished from the newspaper produced by the Young Labor right for this conference, which was again all business, devoted mainly to the campaign against the Howard industrial laws.

The left in Young Labor, which is a significant force, is based largely in the inner-city, while the right is more outer-suburban and ethnically diverse.

The two factions seemed to coexist in a slightly more civilised way than in the past, and it seems there has been a certain evolution in the Young Labor right, which is a good reason not to treat them as an undifferentiated reactionary mass, which the far left outside the Labor Party tends to do.

This development on the right of Young Labor was first apparent on May Day, when 50 or 60 marched for the first time, making them the biggest political contingent, with vigorous slogans against Howard's industrial laws.

Working on the bookstall

Sound and video from the conference floor is piped into the foyer, so it's possible to work on the bookstall and follow the proceedings. For many years my bookstall has been in the left-hand corner of the foyer going in, with Johnno Johnson's official ALP stall selling a few books and his famous ALP puddings to the left and the credentialling counter to the right.

As always, my bookstall is a networking focus at the conference, the other main networking place being Johnno Johnson's tea and pie stall up the corridor.

I brought 30 copies of Mark Latham's diary to the conference and explained why in a short review in the book list that I always put on the seats during the first lunch break, and it sold well.

The best-selling books were two major recently published titles on the Labor Party split in the 1950s and John Edwards's book about the Curtin government, Curtin's Gift.

An important book on Aboriginal affairs, The Way We Civilise, by Rosalind Kidd, sold very well, as did Tariq Ali's book, Speaking of Empire and Resistance. A new book from Ocean Press, Victor Serge's study of the archives of the Russian Okhrana, called What Every Radical Should Know About State Repression, proved surprisingly popular.

Another point of interest was that a number of the histories of particular unions were more popular this year, for obvious reasons. These were mainly bought by the middle, hard-working layer of trade union officials, a number of whom were pretty anxious to talk about the problems of organisation and agitation that they face in the new industrial conditions.

It appears to me that a certain differentiation is taking place among people who work for unions. Many of the young extreme go-getters who thought that a union job was an easy path to a political career seem to have disappeared, either to the big end of town or into staff jobs with politicians.

The union officials who remain, some young and quite a few older, are the more conscientious and serious trade unionists, and this seems to be the case irrespective of whether they're part of the left or the right. The buildup of pressure from this middle layer of union officials seems to be a factor in Beazley's more assertive stance on workplace agreements.

These circumstances are a fair distance from the rather simplistic model of the labour movement that sits uneasily in the minds of most of the far left, whose interest in trade union matters is rather episodic.

The far left and the Labor Party

The striking thing about this conference, which turned out to be so significant, is that the far left pretty well wasn't there. In most past periods, revolutionary socialists such as myself, Issy Wyner, Nick Origlass, Jack Sponberg, George Petersen and a number of others, were well-entrenched at Labor conferences, intervening on major questions.

The Stalinists, who had a very serious implantation in the labour movement, always took the Labor Party state conference very seriously and had considerable influence on the Labor official left. The Communist Party newspaper, Tribune, always had journalists at the conference reporting it in detail.

These days, the much reduced far left makes almost a fetish of ignoring the Labor Party conference, even a rather momentous one, such as this. Green Left Weekly wasn't anywhere to be seen. In the week since the conference, the GLW website, which is always quick to pick on any negative features of the Labor Party, hasn't said a word about the political upheaval that started at the conference and has continued all week in the media about Beazley's pledge to abolish individual workplace contracts.

One small indicator of the state of play in the workers' movement is always the review committee report on admissions to membership of the Labor Party. The ALP rules provide that people who have previously been members of other electoral parties must declare that on applying to join the Labor Party.

Few or none of these applications are rejected, but it's a ritual that provides an interesting overview of who is moving where politically. For many years the people joining the Labor Party with previous allegiances were mostly from the Communist Party and the Australian Democrats. Over the past eight years or so there has been a steady trickle of people from the DSP, the ISO and the Greens. This year there were a number from the Greens and the first crop of people who stated their previous allegiance as the Socialist Alliance.

The old CPA, used to, after a period of initial irritation, try to influence people who had left its ranks to join the Labor Party. That's not the case with the DSP, whose constant anti-Labor rhetoric precludes exerting influence on former members who join the Labor Party, or for that matter the Greens.

To sum up the current political situation in the labour movement. A rapid radicalisation of a rather defensive sort is taking place in difficult objective conditions. It is expressing itself through a rapid development of a more determined stance on basic industrial questions in the Labor Party, the trade unions and the Greens, despite the resistance of conservative forces in all those environments.

Driven by the objective interests of the left part of society and the working class, political developments such as Beazley's stand on workplace agreements are a product of the pressure from the middle layers of trade union activists, including a very large number of union officials, the general viewpoint of whom is reasonably summarised by John Robertson, the leader of Unions NSW.

These developments aren't exactly spontaneous, but the pressure for them is coming more or less spontaneously from the active people in the labour movement, and the far left is marginal in this.

The viewpoint of the middle layers of activists in the labour movement  can be summarised as cautious support for mass mobilisations and industrial action, stubborn determination that the unions and the state governments should take the necessary legal action in the High Court, and a set of demands on the political leadership of the Labor Party that they do the right thing in government, which is the precondition for energetic support of Labor in the elections.

The guarantees on the actions of Labor in government have now been met, so from this point on it's all systems go for varied mobilisations, including the ACTU advertisements, periodic industrial mobilisations and a vigorous election campaign. That's not a bad perspective in current conditions.

Unfortunately, most of the far left is preoccupied with a fantasy about replacing Labor and the Greens electorally, and a bit removed from the general labour movement perspective, to say the least. (Steve Jolly's Melbourne-based Socialist Party, which is usually quite sane, has chosen this moment for a rather sweeping attack on Laborism as propaganda for its proposed new electoral party. Its modest newspaper, which isn't too bad in some respects, lobbed in my letterbox yesterday, and one of the central pieces of its attack on Laborism, to persuade the masses to support the Socialist Party's new party proposal, is an assertion that Labor won't abolish individual workplace agreements. Politics sometimes moves much too fast for people with abstractions, schemas and fantasies in their heads.)

The way the battle lines in Australia are drawn up in general politics is well summarised from the point of view of his industrial and political masters by Matt Price in the June 17 edition of The Australian in the Inquirer section, headed “Do or die for Labor's union connections”.

8/19/2006 11:50:22 PM

Says:

Apologies, I misestimated 2000 words. The rest of Bob Gould's article can be found at: http://www.gouldsbooks.com.au/ozleft/nswlabconf06.html


6/17/2006 2:22:08 AM

Says:

On a quiet sector of a quiet front: a momentous NSW Labor Party conference By Bob Gould The courageous English communist poet John Cornford, who had been moving away from Stalinism, sent his companion Margot Heinemann a moving poem from the Spanish Civil War, which began: “On a quiet sector of a quiet front”, and a few weeks later he was killed in battle. The NSW Labor Party conference, held over two days on the Queens Birthday long weekend was a bit like Cornford's poem. I've attended every NSW Labor Party conference, the whole 40 of them, since 1954, many times as a delegate and for many years now running a bookstall of labour movement books in the foyer of the impressive Sydney Town Hall auditorium. This was possibly the quietest conference I have ever attended. Many of these events have been far more boisterous than this one, with demonstrations outside on the Town Hall steps and protests in the gallery directed at the 900 delegates on the floor of the conference. This conference was not like that, at all. It was all business. It's the state conference before the coming state and federal elections, so there probably won't be another one for two years. Even at the big, turbulent conferences there are usually two events: the one on the floor, in the gallery and on the steps; and the linked event under the stage and in the caucus rooms on the other side of the corridors, where pressure is exerted and deals are made. In the relatively quiet, defensive atmosphere facing the labour movement, the overt agitation was much reduced, but the pressure and deal-making under the stage and in the caucus rooms was intense indeed, reflecting the pressure from the whole trade union movement, which is under the hammer from the Howard Government and the ruling class. Industrial relations was the burning issue at the conference by a country mile, and linked to that was the preoccupation of everyone in the labour movement with the re-election of a Labor govern

6/17/2006 2:18:37 AM

Add a new comment

Only registered users can add comments.

Registering is quick and easy. You will need a valid e-mail account and you will make up a username and password

Click Register to register with us
or Login if you have aleady registered.