(Written for The Solidarity NSC 13/06/09)

 Comrades, 

In every election since Solidarity’s foundation I have provided the NSC with a breakdown of our performance at the polls. I have attempted once again to provide comrades with the information of our performance although obviously this time as part of the No2EU –Yes to Democracy initiative rather than as Solidarity on our own. However, simply providing a stark set of figures and results is not enough.

I have therefore attempted to offer my own analysis of the European Elections, what the result means for Solidarity and for the rest of the left in this country. The report is not necessarily for voting on nor am I proposing it is the accepted view of the Solidarity NSC. Rather I hope this report can help provide a framework around which we can conduct a meaningful dialogue and analysis of the elections at our National Steering Committee this coming weekend.    

Graeme McIver

Solidarity Scotland’s Socialist Movement

National Secretary

11/06/09 

N.B All results are taken from the BBC News website.        

The 2009 European Elections – An Overview

No analysis of the voting that took place across the UK on June 4th can begin without reference to the complete and catastrophic collapse of the vote for New Labour. Registering at less than 16% the vote for Labour was their worst performance in a nationwide election since before the First World War. Writing in his blog on the BBC News website, the (ex student Tory) political commentator Nick Robinson said; “It was a long night of painful firsts for the Labour Party. The first time that Labour has been beaten into third place by what we used to call a minor party – UKIP. The first time - since 1918 - that the party has not come first in a Welsh election. The first UK-wide election in which the Scottish Nationalists have beaten Labour. The first time that the BNP has been elected to a parliament or assembly in areas where Labour's vote collapsed.” All across the country, working class people deserted the Labour party in unprecedented numbers.

The consensus amongst the media talking heads has been to portray this as a victory for the right wing in these elections however, an analysis of the 2 parties that finished ahead of Labour, The Tories and UKIP, shows that the combined % rise in their vote was only 1.3% (1% and 0.3% respectively.) Given the problems the government finds itself in the fact that the Tories could make no significant headway is reflective of the fact that people do not see the Tories as the answer to the problems people face day and daily.

Rather than vote for a political alternative to Labour, the vast majority of the population failed to register a vote with turnout falling below 35%. Clearly, the depth of the economic crisis and the lack of a coherent strategy or solution being advanced by any of the mainstream parties, (the Lib/Dems vote was down by 1.2%) allied to the expenses scandal at Westminster turned voters off from participating in the elections. Added to this frustration is clearly a feeling that the European Parliament is distant and irrelevant to many people. The other story of the night was the success of the BNP in securing 2 MEP’s in the English regions of Yorkshire and Humberside and the North West despite the fact that they gained fewer votes in these areas than in the 2004 Euro elections. 

The vagaries of the D’Hondt voting system however means that there is hardly a seismic shift in terms of seats won and lost. Despite their collapse, Labour only lost 5 seats with UKIP and the Tories picking up only 1 each. In Scotland, despite having arguably the best election result in their history, the SNP saw no increase in their number of MEP’s. Across Europe voter apathy towards the European Parliament continued with turnout falling once again to around 43%. It should be remembered however that this figure is artificially inflated by the fact that some countries have compulsory voting. If the figures did not include those skewed statistics then the average turnout would be much lower again. The centre right emerged with the most seats on the night but similarly to the right wing parties in the UK, none of them substantially increased their vote. Instead they benefited from a sharp fall in the centre left vote in many European countries. Speaking after the election Tony Benn said; "When people fear that they are not protected by their governments, they go back to nationalism."  

Scottish Overview 

In Scotland a markedly different voting pattern emerged compared to England and Wales. Both the Tories and UKIP saw their vote decrease whilst the SNP increased their share of the vote by almost 10% to just under 30%.  In contrast Labour’s vote share plummeted by over 5% to just above 20%. This means that the SNP has now defeated Labour in successive elections in Scotland although the margin of victory and the fact this was a UK wide election makes the SNP’s success all the more significant.

In Wales, although Plaid Cymru saw their vote share increase it was by only just over 1%. Similarly to the result in England, the Welsh electorate voted in slightly increased numbers for the Tories and UKIP. The failure of the right to even hold onto it’s % total from 5 years ago indicates that unlike in England and Wales where the Tories have emerged as the leading party, voters in Scotland are instead looking to the centre left as an alternative to Brown and New Labour. 

We in Solidarity have many criticisms of the SNP administration. Like governments across the planet they have looked like rabbits caught in the headlights of the crisis in world capitalism. Having promoted countries such as Iceland and Ireland as shining examples of economic prosperity that Scotland should try and replicate they have had to watch as the tiger economies they wanted to copy have collapsed. They have pandered to big business, abandoned their pledge to abolish the hated council tax, propose to replace disgraceful PFI schemes with a fudged “futures trust” and will shortly be forced into implementing savage cuts to public services across Scotland. 

Yet they have built support on populist left of centre ideas such as free prescriptions, the abolition of bridge tolls, the introduction of free school meals, an opposition to the wars in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq and at least made manifesto commitments to replacing the council tax with a fairer alternative. The SNP learned the lessons of the success of socialists in the 2003 Scottish elections and have made a concerted effort to present themselves to the left of Labour. (Admittedly not that hard a task!) Alex Salmond has seen off challenges from a variety of ineffectual Scottish Labour leaders and he and his party have emerged from 2 years in power at Holyrood and the Westminster expenses scandal relatively unscathed and confident of further electoral success.  

Once again however the vast majority of the Scottish electorate did not vote. Turnouts in Glasgow and North Lanarkshire registered in the low 20%’s. The fact is that in the poorest areas of Scotland’s towns and cities turnout has fallen into the teens of percentages with the majority of voters disengaged from the democratic process. Clearly the majority of voters are disenchanted and disillusioned with the mainstream parties. With a General Election looming the question of Scottish Independence will again come to the fore. The Herald newspaper this week reported the findings of a poll which suggests that opposition to Independence has been falling steadily over the last two years; 

"Opposition to independence for Scotland has fallen to below 40% for the first time, according to a poll by TNS-BMRB, formerly System Three. While there still remains greater opposition to, than support for, independence, the proportion of those set against Scotland going alone has fallen steadily over the last two years. At the start of the series of snapshots in August 2007, opposition to independence stood at 50%, support for independence was 35%, with only 15% undecided. Now after seven such polls by TNS-BMRB, opposition to independence has declined by 11 points, those undecided have risen by 10 points, while core support for separation appears largely unchanged at 35%-40%."

The Left Performance

 It would perhaps be helpful to provide a table showing the performance of the “smaller” parties at a UK level followed by the results from Scotland. (I have missed out the plethora of smaller parties who achieved less than 0.5%)  

UK Overview 

With the Tories, UKIP and The Lib/Dems failing to make significant gains the percentage drop in the Labour vote was shared out between a number of “smaller” parties. Of this the Greens did the best and clearly were seen by some to be a progressive and worthwhile receptacle of a protest vote. The party held onto their 2 MEP’s but were unable to secure enough support to make a breakthrough. The BNP unfortunately secured the headlines on the night by winning two seats in the European parliament with victories in Yorkshire and Humberside and The North West region of England. The party saw an increase in its vote by just over 1%. Ordinary people everywhere shocked at the sight of the racist Griffin celebrating his victory can at least take a crumb of comfort that there was not the substantial increase in the BNP vote that some feared. However, the uncomfortable fact is that for the first time in the UK the far right has managed to secure elected representatives in a national election. The SLP and No2EU both received almost identical number of votes far below the threshold required to even challenge for a seat. (More analysis on this and the BNP result below.)  

Scottish Overview 

It is clear that of all the smaller parties in Scotland only the Greens were in a position to challenge for a seat but they too, in the end fell well short of the percentage required to unseat any of the incumbent MEP’s. Of the rest of the smaller parties, only UKIP and The SSP had stood in the previous election in 2004. UKIP’s vote fell by 1.5% whilst the SSP haemorrhaged votes from its previous level of 5.2% to less than 1%. The SLP emerged as the largest of the socialist parties on 2% with The SSP and No2EU each emerging with just short of 1% of the vote.    

No2EU – Yes to Democracy

Overview of Result

 It is important for us in Solidarity to analyse the result of No2EU and to draw the appropriate conclusions about our involvement in the process and where we go from here. 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 is a disappointing result. (Although not entirely unexpected as I will explain later.) This coupled with the success of the BNP 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 we agreed to participate.

Solidarity entered into the initial talks with the component parts of the coalition on the basis that we 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. 

We 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 Lyndsey 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 4th 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.   

Where Now for the Left?

 If ever there was a wake up call for the left it came in the early hours of the morning on Monday 8th June when Nick Griffin mounted the podium at the North West regional count in Manchester City Hall. The BNP leader basked in the glory that had seen himself and fellow racist Andrew Brons elected to the European Parliament. In the early 90’s the left and anti-fascists had mobilised to stop the growth of the BNP following the election of Derek Beacon as a councilor in the Isle of Dogs. Yet some 15 years later the BNP have 2 MEP’s, almost 1 million votes across the UK, as much publicity as they want and millions of pounds of resources at their disposal over the next 5 years.

Whilst Labour may have faced electoral losses at the polls last week it is communities up and down the country where the BNP spread their poison that will be the real losers. Figures show that wherever they are successful you see a rise in racist attacks and in community tensions. We on the left have to accept that we have lost a battle in our bid to halt the rise of the BNP and have to learn some important lessons (and quickly) if we are to avoid losing the war. 

At the time of the activity to stop the BNP following Beacon’s election the Labour party was experiencing a rise in support and membership as it headed for success at the 1997 General Election. A campaign to urge voters to vote for anybody but the BNP would often logically lead to arguing for votes for New Labour who, despite their drift to the right were still seen as a party who broadly represented the needs and aspirations of working class communities. Yet in 2009 to go into places that historically were Labour heartlands like Barnsley, Burnley and Oldham and advocate a vote for Labour would be treated with derision by working class people who feel abandoned by Labour and the other parties.

Channel 4 this week reported on the findings of a YouGov poll that interviewed over 1,000 BNP voters. They reported; 

“Yet, depending on how the term “racist” is precisely defined, our survey suggests that the label applies to only around a half of BNP voters. On their own, these votes would not have been enough to give the BNP either of the seats they won last night. There are two telling pieces of evidence that suggest wider causes of disenchantment. Seven out of 10 BNP voters (and almost as many Green and Ukip voters) think that “there is no real difference these between Britain’s three main parties”.  

But perhaps the most startling finding came when we tested anecdotal reports that many BNP voters were old Labour sympathisers who felt that the party no longer speaks up for them. It turns out to be true. As many as 59 per cent of BNP voters think that Labour “used to care about the concerns of people like me but doesn’t nowadays”.   What is more worrying for Labour is that this sentiment is shared by millions of voters, way beyond the ranks of BNP voters.

Overall, 63 per cent of the British public think Labour used to care about their concerns – and only 19 per cent think it does today.” The BNP has occupied ground abandoned by the New Labour project. It is their failure to properly represent the needs and aspirations of what used to be Labour’s core vote that has seen the far right elected and Labour’s national share of the vote fall to under 16%.

This sense of abandonment, allied to the greed and corruption displayed by many politicians during the expenses scandal in particular has also seen a sharp rise in the numbers of people abstaining in this and all other elections. Whilst this trend gives us much cause for concern it also gives an insight into why a united left challenge in elections, involving all the different sections of the left, trade unionists, greens, other environmentalists and progressives could be successful. It would also provide a concrete option to propose to voters who refuse to vote Labour as a viable alternative to the BNP. 

It is right that we challenge the growth of the BNP but we should not be obsessive as seeing combating them as our only strategy in the period ahead. We can best undermine the politics of racism, division and hate by promoting a different kind of agenda by concentrating on economic issues and socialist policies that can rejuvenate communities and pose a real alternative to the failures of capitalism. We can prove in action and deed that socialists active in their communities, united with others can offer a solution to the hopelessness and betrayal that drives people to either vote BNP or not vote at all. 

Here in Scotland we are not faced with an imminent far right threat. Whilst we must remain vigilant we also must keep the levels of support for the BNP in perspective. The real battles ahead will come when the governments at Westminster and Holyrood increase their attacks on the public sector, public services and working class people in order to pay for the crisis in capitalism. This will see sharp increases in unemployment, attacks on standards of living, on wages and conditions and on the trade union movement.  

In order to best resist these attacks then the left has a duty to seek ways in which we can work together. This does not mean that we must immediately all rush to join a new party of the left here in Scotland. It is clear that there are deep divisions that cannot be healed in the short term.

Given that a court case has still to take place it is folly to suggest that at this time the SSP and Solidarity can set aside differences and once again unite into the one party. However, there is absolutely no reason that we cannot discuss, along with the SLP, environmentalists and other progressive forces ways in which we ensure we do not stand against each other in elections. There is no reason where good relations exist between socialist activists locally that they cannot work and campaign together whilst remaining members of their own organisation. More than that we can examine the possibility of uniting behind candidates that may be acceptable to all the different groups on the left whether they be a trade unionist, a community activist or a well known local campaigner. There are initiatives like the various charters that have been pulled together that we could unite behind creating a minimal programme that we can all agree on and support whilst retaining our individual identities and groupings. 

The last NSC Management Committee instructed me to write to some trade union leaders in Scotland asking them to broker a meeting where all the different groups could come together and at least discuss the possibility of unity behind a candidate at the Glasgow North East by-election caused by the resignation of Michael Martin. In that e-mail I said; “We (in Solidarity) believe that this by-election offers an unrivaled opportunity for the left to try and put aside differences and unify in a temporary electoral pact or coalition. This will not be an easy task. It will require negotiation and compromise by all involved. There are deep divisions amongst groups on the left that make this kind of joint working difficult.  Never the less, we believe we have a duty to working class communities like Glasgow North East to put aside those differences. If the call for such unity was to come from either ourselves or one of the various parties of the left in Scotland then there is the likelihood that it would be treated with suspicion and be rejected by the others. If however the call came from respected trade unionist then there is a much greater chance of the initiative succeeding.” 

Our NSC will have to discuss this issue as a matter or urgency. 

At the forthcoming General Election it is unlikely that any group would be in a position to seriously hope to win a seat. Therefore it should be perfectly reasonable to assume that agreements could be reached to ensure that only one left wing/socialist or progressive candidate is standing in any one seat. At the Scottish Elections this may prove more problematic on the list system. However given that election is still a few years away then a lot can happen before then. This approach requires cool heads and a willingness to compromise for the good of the class. If the different groups go off and reach the conclusion that their party or sect or organisation provides the one true way forward then any initiative is doomed to failure.  

We must look seriously at the failures of the left, even in this time of economic crisis to make any kinds of inroads. We in Solidarity were genuinely hopeful that No2EU could provide a unified left challenge at the Euro elections however that was not the case and we have to learn lessons from that experience. As outlined above No2EU polled less than 1% in Scotland.

The SLP, polled only 2% technically making them the largest of the socialist parties. However, despite having a handful of no doubt dedicated individuals they have absolutely no activist base in Scotland.  Any name that includes both the terms “Socialist” and “Labour” means that despite lack of members, no profile and virtually no activity they will always pick up a residual left wing vote. In previous elections that has been enough to deprive the then unified SSP seats in areas like Fife. (2003 Scottish Elections.) It is to be hoped that the SLP leadership do not draw the wrong conclusions from the results either last week or at the previous election in the Glasgow North East constituency.  In the absence of the Labour party name on the ballot paper (it was the “speakers” constituency) the SLP polled a large number of votes that clearly were mistakenly meant for New Labour. The SLP enjoyed no similare success anywhere else during that election and could not even find a candidate from the city of Glasgow. 

Despite having at least some activist base, more media coverage than all of the other small parties and continuity of a name that previously had been successful, The SSP polled less that 1% of the vote last week. This is a poor result for the party that cannot be explained away by constantly and simply blaming Solidarity and the split for the position they find themselves in.  

Yet there were signs of what could be achieved by the left during last weeks poll. In Ireland we saw the fantastic election of Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party who received 13% of first preference votes whilst the People Before Profit coalition was successful in getting 5 councillors elected in the same country. Joe Higgins has proved that by having an outstanding record of fighting on behalf of his class and concentrating on issues that are relevant to people and putting forward socialist arguments success can be achieved.  

We owe it to the working class of Scotland to make sure that we are seen to be trying to work with others to provide a coherent and viable socialist alternative to the chaos caused by capitalism. A by-election in Glasgow North East constituency would provide a perfect platform for a united left candidate, backed by trade unionists, the SLP, The SSO, Solidarity, left Greens and other progressive forces to unite on a minimal broad left programme and present the electorate with a clear left choice.

ENDS