https://iclfi.org/pubs/wh/252/tusc
Below is a transcript of the presentation by Eibhlin McColgan of the SL to the 3 February 2024 TUSC Convention in Birmingham, edited for publication.
Thank you comrades, I appreciate being given the time to explain why the Spartacist League has applied to participate in TUSC’s election campaign. We think it is a good initiative. We agree with TUSC comrades — it absolutely is in the interests of the working class to have a socialist opposition to Starmer’s Labour in the election. We welcome TUSC’s campaign because it draws a class line against Starmer. We are prepared to build that campaign and to make it successful. We would like to stand a candidate under the TUSC banner; we are prepared to campaign for and vote for TUSC candidates where possible.
We agree that TUSC’s core policies are a minimum that voters would expect from a socialist campaign. We have two amendments to be debated under the next agenda point: we think we should only vote for left MPs who oppose a Starmer government and we’re opposed to supporting prison guards. But, to answer Comrade Nellist’s question, even if our amendments are voted down we are still prepared to run as TUSC candidates and support TUSC’s initiative.
We very much appreciate that TUSC gives participating organisations the autonomy to run their own independent campaigns. The turnout here today is disappointing: we think all the other left groups should join forces in a united electoral opposition to Starmer, fight together for the things that we agree on, while presenting their own independent views.
I want to explain our independent campaign and show how it’s different from TUSC’s. At the same time I will show that adding our programme to the TUSC campaign will build up TUSC and strengthen it as a working-class opposition to Starmer.
Our difference with TUSC is simple. TUSC has dozens of good and supportable demands. But taken together the programme becomes a laundry list that tries to satisfy everyone and offend no one. In trying to appease left MPs and union leaders, it promises everything that Corbyn promised — including in his 2019 manifesto — but which he could not deliver. The question is why? That’s because Corbyn was not prepared to engage in a serious confrontation with the capitalist rulers. We think TUSC’s programme has the same problem.
Our programme offers five bold, sharp demands that throw down the gauntlet to the capitalist class. The theme is:
Workers must run the country!
- Liberate Palestine!
- Down with NATO!
- Expropriate the banks!
- Citizenship rights for immigrants!
- Down with the monarchy!
I’m sure every socialist organisation in the country — and everyone in this room — agrees with these demands. They are intended to give a voice to the visceral class hatred of the millions of people who despise Starmer, especially over his support to the genocide of the Palestinians. They will drive the likes of Starmer and Blair hysterical. And they put it squarely to the left Labour and trade union leaders: what side are you on?
Down with NATO: This is a red line for the British ruling class that takes its marching orders from Washington. It also drives a wedge against the likes of Sharon Graham and John McDonnell who are warmongers over Ukraine.
Expropriate the banks: The only way to reindustrialise the so-called Red Wall working-class areas of England, as well as Scotland and Wales, is to seize the capital in the City of London.
Citizenship rights for immigrants: This demand is to cut through the obscene racist squabbling over how to get rid of refugees that are rotting in prison camps.
Down with the monarchy: We’ve had enough of Labour and trade union leaders bowing and scraping before the Crown as we saw when the Queen croaked. We developed a saying at that time — “A leadership that’s too spineless to oppose the monarchy will never have the backbone to confront the British ruling class.”
We’re not promising the moon. We are promising a serious confrontation with the ruling class. Our aim is to give a taste of what an actual workers government would look like. It’s not a parliamentary body where you elect a majority of socialist MPs. The model for TUSC is the same “broad church” that led to disaster for Corbyn. Corbyn’s programme did touch on some of the bourgeoisie’s red lines, including his opposition to Trident and to the European Union. But when he became Labour leader, Corbyn was faced with a choice. He could either organise a serious confrontation with the ruling class or cave in. He caved in, because Corbyn’s programme did not politically equip him for a serious confrontation with the capitalist order.
To conclude: our perspective will strengthen TUSC as a working-class opposition to Starmer. Our approach to TUSC is a small step in our overall goal, which is to build a socialist movement in this country in opposition to Labour by totally breaking the mould that has paralysed the left for decades. We aim to unite under one banner all the forces that are committed to waging the kind of uncompromising class battles that it will take to bring down the rotten British ruling class.
Debate on left MPs
Below is a transcript of our comrade Kaur’s intervention at the TUSC Convention, edited for publication.
I would like to motivate the amendment under the attitude to left-wing candidates put forward by the Spartacist League, which reads as:
“The joint election challenge will not in general seek to contest seats against left-wing Labour candidates or left MPs or ex-MPs standing as independents so long as they stand on a pro-working-class programme and refuse to support a Starmer government.” [amendment in italics]
We believe that this amendment will strengthen TUSC and boost its chances at electoral strength because it will enhance the appeal of TUSC as a challenge in the eyes of workers, minorities and youth looking for an alternative to Starmer’s Labour. Our amendment insists that our attitude to left-wing or left Labour MPs must be based on a pro-working-class programme and a refusal to build a Starmer government. Why is this crucial for building the working-class challenge that TUSC seeks to provide?
Comrades, we are together in this room today because we understand the necessity of having a working-class voice in Britain. Starmer has drawn a hard line on each question facing our class: Palestine, NATO, trade unions, lifting caps on bankers’ bonuses, you name it. He will carry on sticking it to the workers. So when it comes to left or independent MPs, our criteria must be their attitude towards Starmer: will they take a stand with the working class against Starmer and refuse to build his government, or will they speak left but ultimately build a Starmer government when elected? This is the class line, comrades.
And we believe that it would defeat the very purpose of TUSC if it supports these candidates or doesn’t stand against them. I think it would amount to leaving the back door open to supporting a Starmer government.
I want to touch on the question of the 2019 manifesto, which is looming in the background here. I want to remind the room that Starmer himself said he was for the 2019 manifesto back in the day, only to throw Corbyn and the left wing out of Labour. So, I don’t think it matters if you verbally pledge your support to the manifesto. I think the question is now! Where do you stand on opposing or supporting Starmer? This has to be our criteria.
I want to motivate our amendment against the three other amendments being proposed under this point. These amendments stem from either logistics and practicalities or a real hatred for Labour, but they end up splitting the working-class vote because they disregard any left-wing MPs who might actually come on to our side to build a united challenge at the elections.
Response to opposition to our amendment
I’d like to respond to the criticism from the speaker from the Socialist Party about how workers may be confused by our amendment as being for a bloc with the Tories. I believe that’s the content of your opposition to our amendment and I think that, frankly, it is very misplaced. We are building TUSC here. Our argument is that drawing a class line and making that class line sharper by saying for or against a Starmer government will actually enhance our appeal in the eyes of workers and actually tap into that real hatred for Starmer. I don’t think they will think, “Oh well, you’re against Starmer, so objectively, you’re for a bloc with the Tories”. I think the substance of what you put forward as a criticism of our amendment really undermines the entire purpose of TUSC here.
I’d also like to address the speaker from the Socialist Students. If I understood correctly, you said: “why would we stand a candidate against Zarah Sultana”, as an example? I think she’s a great example of a left-Labour MP who has been super vocal about Palestine, yet if we look at the objective social role she plays: she is in the Labour Party, and come elections, she will campaign for a Labour government. Our point is that actions speak louder than words at the end of the day. And this applies to the 2019 manifesto, it applies to Palestine, it applies to all kinds of left speakers. Sultana will vote Labour at the end of the day.
That doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t want to advocate tactics towards her. We will put it to her: we are for Palestinian liberation — take a side! If you are against genocide, break with Starmer! That is the choice! And that is actually how you’re going to build TUSC. That is the way to drive a wedge. Not to conciliate her because she’s got lots of support in Coventry. You know, all those people in Coventry are looking for a real way to go forward and use her in some way to have a path forward against Starmer. As Marxists, you have to look at the social role that individuals play. All her pro-Palestine stuff aside, at the end of the day, she will vote Labour, she will be part of a Labour government, and that will be a Starmer government! And the purpose of TUSC is to fight against the prospects of a Starmer government by enhancing, to the best of our goddamn capabilities, the working-class voice.
No support to prison guards!
We have already explained how we view TUSC as a much-needed class opposition against Starmer. So, I’m just going to get straight to the point.
We propose to remove the following clause [from TUSC’s core policy platform]: “Reinstate full trade union rights to prison officers.”
This policy is explicitly counterposed to the idea that TUSC is standing on the side of the working class. Prison guard unions, just like cop associations, are about defending naked state violence, not the oppressed. Thousands of activists, working-class families and minorities, as well as Irish Republicans, have directly experienced brutality and murder at the hands of the prison guards. This would alienate millions of potential voters, particularly those involved in BLM and Just Stop Oil, not to mention the anti-war activists that have been mentioned numerous times today.
Rather than defending any so-called “right” of brutal state henchmen, we should be for defending the rights of prisoners, especially in the context where Starmer and Sunak are arguing over who can be toughest on crime. This is why we urge you to vote in favour of this amendment.
