Intense debate has taken place on the left about the coalition No2EU-Yes2Democracy (for the DGS perspective, please refer to our editorial ‘Yes to Europe and Yes to Democracy’ in our last issue). Graeme McIver, National Secretary of Solidarity, argues why it was correct to support No2EU-Yes2Democracy.

No2EU – Yes to Democracy and the European Elections

There is a tendency amongst left wing groups and parties to talk up even obviously disappointing results. On the face of it securing an average of just 1% across the country and 0.9% in Scotland in the recent European Elections is a disappointing result for the No2EU – Yes to Democracy political platform. (Although not entirely unexpected as I will explain later.)

This coupled with the success of the BNP in England has led some on the left to question the very foundation of the No2EU – Yes to Democracy platform and to question its tactics in deciding to stand at such short notice prior to an election.

Within Solidarity itself there has been a debate over our involvement with the platform.

Many comrades held principled objections to the name, aspects of the programme and the internal democratic structures of the organisation. Others had fundamental disagreements over the platforms orientation to the whole question of Europe. (As a young party we have yet to have an agreed policy on our attitude to Europe.) The fudging over the issue of the taking up of seats and the discussions around Tommy Sheridan’s position on the Scottish candidate list played a part in ensuring that the decision of Solidarity to affiliate to the campaign was not without controversy internally. It should come as no surprise that there was a degree of debate within the party. Both the SSP and Respect had debates over the issue of No2EU. Although Respect ultimately voted against becoming involved their former National Secretary Nick Wrack stood on the No2EU list in London. A vote to discuss the issue of No2EU further was only beaten by the vote of the chair at the SSP conference on the island of Arran.

It is important however to remind ourselves the reasons why Solidarity agreed to participate. We entered into the initial talks with the component parts of the coalition on the basis that the party had already agreed a position of seeking left unity in elections at our December National Steering Committee. Just weeks after agreeing that position we were presented with an opportunity to join in a national coalition of left forces being led by a trade union that had broken from New Labour.

Ever since the rightward drift of the New Labour project socialists have called on trade union leaders to make a break from the party that no longer represented the politics or aspirations of trade unionists. Bob Crow and the RMT are one of the few unions who have made that break. The RMT and its membership have been in the front line of the attacks made on them by government and big business and drew the conclusion that they needed an electoral vehicle to advance arguments on behalf of their membership.

Railway workers played a key role in helping to found the Labour Party and almost 100 years later were once again prepared to take a stand on the basis that none of the main political parties represented the interests of their membership.

The Solidarity NSC felt that it was the right thing to stand shoulder to shoulder with them and other socialists and progressives who made up the No2EU platform. Yes we had criticisms of the project and we voiced them and made them clear from the beginning. The majority feeling in Solidarity was that it was better to be a part of the process, attempting to influence its direction rather than standing outside criticising.

It is clear that if Solidarity had its way then the name of the platform would have been different. It would have sounded more progressive, maybe would have contained the word socialism or made reference to the fact that it was a trade union backed initiative.

If we had our way then we would have been clear from the beginning that if elected our MEP’s would attend the parliament and represent the working class people who had elected us taking no more than the average wage of a skilled worker.

If we had our way then there would have been more autonomy for the component parts of the coalition in Scotland to develop our own strategy and programme, perhaps even it’s own name.

If we had our way then Tommy Sheridan would have topped the list in Scotland and we would have used his profile to try and generate much more coverage than we received in the media. (We would have made sure that he appeared in the Party Political Broadcast as well.)

We think that all of those things would have increased the platforms chances of gaining a better vote and making a greater impact. Yet, after discussion and debate Solidarity accepted the decisions that were reached amongst the coalition and we played our part in trying to make No2EU as successful as we could.

Perhaps it is the nature of many on the left to say that if you can’t get your own way then you should walk away? The reality is that would have meant Solidarity and it’s membership either fought a small and poorly funded election campaign of our own, or abstained from the European elections whilst at the same time other socialists and trade unionists were uniting together on an anti fascist platform promoting workers rights and exposing the anti –democratic nature of Europe.

Committing yourself to seeking left unity at elections means that there are bound to be compromises required by all those involved. Had the SSP become involved in the platform Solidarity may have put forward a different candidate than Tommy Sheridan to top the list in order to remove any possible barriers to unity. However, given their refusal to join, Solidarity felt that the best way of achieving recognition for No2EU – Yes to Democracy was to propose Tommy and use his public profile to help build the platform. The fact is that the only coverage No2EU received in Scotland was on the basis of Tommy’s involvement. The fact he was not number 1 on the list undoubtedly contributed to the subsequent lack of coverage. Yet on hearing of the decision to make him number 2 on the Scottish list Tommy Sheridan immediately issued a statement saying;

“I believe the No2EU list agreed for the Scottish region at the steering committee in the London headquarters of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union tonight is a first class combination of socialists, trade union activists and prominent campaign leaders. As Solidarity convenor I am proud to be on the list alongside comrade Leah Ganley, John Foster and the others. The No2EU Project is a trade union led initiative designed to unite left forces in the labour movement and beyond behind a progressive socialist and working class programme for the European elections. We are proud as a Party to be playing such a prominent role in this trade union led platform.”

In the end, Tommy Sheridan and fellow Solidarity member Leah Ganley joined candidates from The RMT, The Socialist Party, the CPB, the Morning Star and The Indian Workers Association such as Bob Crow, Dave Nellist, John Hendy QC, workers leaders from the Lindsey Oil Refinery dispute (who played a vital role in diverting that dispute away from reactionary slogans) the convenor of the Visteon plant occupation as well as trade union activists and socialists from across the country on a platform that argued against the exploitation of workers across Europe and the world. No other left or progressive party standing on June the 4^th could claim to have such a broad range of candidates with links to the socialist, labour and trade union movement.

Most importantly, Solidarity has played its part in what we hope will be the beginnings of something much more substantial and important for the left. No2EU – Yes to Democracy has shown that parties of the left that previously have never worked together can cooperate successfully despite having disagreements and differences.

Speaking after the election results were announced, RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said;

“Along with our colleagues from the SLP and other left groups we won nearly a third of a million votes. From No2EU we won over 150,000 supporters from a standing start in the teeth of a media blackout. That gives us a solid platform to build from. We now need urgent discussions with political parties, campaigns and our colleagues in other unions like the CWU to develop a political and industrial response to this crisis.”

Yet whatever its strengths in terms of the make up and its component parts the fact that the platform was set up with only 7 weeks till the election meant it was always going to struggle to make significant electoral inroads.

As we in Solidarity know only too well trying to establish a new name and reputation prior to an election is no easy task. This was hampered by lack of resources. Although The RMT committed substantial funds to the project the fact that it was a nationwide campaign meant that there was very little money left over for leaflets and campaigning material. (Here in Scotland the platform could only provide enough leaflets for some areas of the central belt.) Allied to an almost total media blackout it is no surprise that No2EU failed to make a bigger impact.

However, No2EU has shown that a trade union led initiative has the potential to create a pole of attraction to the left of Labour that is bigger than just the sum of all the different left organisations. The involvement of No2EU – Yes to Democracy in the European Elections has to be seen therefore in the context of a starting point for something new rather than the finished article.