The Real Question of Race in Labour Party
The April 2020 Online meeting “the last
straw”, which a staggering 500 plus BAME members attended, may yet prove to be a defining
moment in the struggle against Racism within the Labour party and the movement.
Held during the heart of a global pandemic and
lockdown, when people have so many other worries, a gathering of such numbers demonstrated the depth of anger that exists within the membership at the revelations in the recent leaked report. The
shock at the naked racism exposed at the highest levels of the Party has been felt by all of us. Significantly, during the period, which the report covers, race has been centre stage. Whether
the issue is Anti-Semitism, The Windrush scandal or the Grenfell fire. To add to that fire of anger and disillusionment is the growing evidence that BAME communities are at the frontline of the
Covid-19 experience - as care workers, doctors nurses, patients are sadly, disproportionately represented amongst the deceased.
There will be anger that for all the talk of
racism within the party the real fight is not Anti-Semitism, disgusting though that is, but the old fashioned deeply engrained Sambo type that we thought was burned and banished from the party in the
1960s. Then, as is apparent now, the culture enabled Tilbury Dockers to march against immigration from the commonwealth and Bob Mellish, former chief whip to Harold Wilson and a TGWU sponsored
MP, to stand in Southwark Town Hall and begin an address to the local party with “As I
come to this platform, many of you will know that I have never been an anti-racialist”. He went on to argue that Malawi Asians should
not be allowed to enter Britain despite them holding British passports.
The injury, which the report has visited on
BAME members, and the racism it has revealed has to be set against the growing realisation that, with the loss of 62 of the most solid Labour seats, the epicentre of the party has shifted to the
major urban centres, all of which boast BAME communities of more than decisive proportions.
This new landscape will not have been lost on
the Tories, who emboldened by their success at the 2019 election will seek to capitalise on their penetration of the relatively wealthy professional business Asian class, as embodied in the current
Chancellor Rishi Sunak. They will not give up the opportunity to woo back working-class Asians on racial rather than economic grounds – enticing them to abandon old loyalties and cross sides.
Following the Hindu BJP party’s blueprint from the 2019 election. The Tories will crudely mock Labour by boasting two home secretaries, two chancellors of Asian ancestry and a couple of African
ministers. By contrast the Labour party signalled its change of leadership by removing the black Shadow ministers for the Home Office and Immigration.
Electorally, this will represent a far greater
challenge to Labour than the open call of the Jewish Board of Deputies to abandon Labour at the last election. Today, unlike in the 50s and 60s, the vast majority of the existing Jewry, in line with
their social and economic mobility, are Tory voters. A 2015 Survation poll for The Times found that of approximately 300,000 Jews in the UK only 15% voted Labour when the party was led by Ed
Miliband. In contrast, 64 % voted for the Conservatives. Estimates put Black and Asian votes in the region of 5 million. What difference could they affect in the composition of Westminster if
mobilised in the Labour cause?
It is not an exaggeration to say that any hint
of a Hierarchy of race within the Party, which the firestorm around anti-Semitism has suggested, is a threat to electoral success and the very survival of the party. As such race and racism are
issue of paramount importance, which the entire membership must engage with and resolve, and not just the Black and Asian members. Swift action must be taken to censure and discipline anyone, however
senior, who has bullied, undermined or ridiculed black members of the shadow cabinet. Only, swift and effective action will demonstrate to the electorate that there is no room in the party for such
behaviour. In the past, many have demanded expulsion of members of the Party for far less than the behaviour highlighted by the leaked report.
An allied issue is the under representation
of Black and Asian members at the National level of the Party. The current electoral system remains unsatisfactory and must be changed to provide BAME members of the Labour Party
the right to choose their own representatives at all levels up to and including the nomination of Parliamentary Candidates. In the recent election to replace Chukka Ummana in South London, it was
readily accepted that there should be an all-women shortlist, but only begrudgingly accepted that there should be an all-Black women shortlist. It was the only seat in the entire country where
such an approach was adopted. Underrepresentation is a serious problem and has to be addressed
Nonetheless this issue is not the most
pressing facing self-organisation within the party. The main issue is building on the base in the community and campaigning on the issues of racism.
The Black Sections of 1987 produced Bernie
Grant and Diane Abbot. These two consciously devoted themselves to their commitments to fight racism and discrimination. On the other hand, it also produced Keith Vaz, Valerie Vaz and Paul Boateng
whose interests were more International trade fairs than trade unions, more the financial interest of the business elite then the daily interest of ordinary people. It is not surprising from this
quarter came the call to depoliticise the Black and Asian Name developed through the united struggles against racism and to replace it with the amorphous BAME label. This stark return to a Colonial
outlook defining the world as superior White on one side and everyone else on the other. Their actions and the autocratic way they seek to hijack the struggles of ordinary people and subjugate them
to their own narrow class interest is a return to tried and tested methods of dark days. These same British invented practices were imported into America in the 1960s and updated in
response to the growing civil rights movement. Put simply, cut off and isolate the bottom up radical grassroots organisations and replace them with top down leaders who are rewarded with privileges,
protection and status. This is why Africa is as it is today with its leaders filling their boots while their people eat grass.
These same currents are driving the
conflicting developments for genuine representation on the NEC, the leadership of the party and our trade unions. Nothing underlines this better than the actions of Carol Sewell in her new role as
BAME NEC representative - the replacement for the fallen Keith Vaz. With the confidence of a Francophone Puppet dictator at the French court, her first act was to argue that Racism should not be
included in the terms of reference into the investigation ordered by Sir Keir Starmer on the grounds that it would “predetermine the outcome”. Appoint the ‘right’ people and
you don’t need to tell them what to do.
The historic moment of the meeting was the
introduction and contribution of Kim Johnson - the first Black MP from Liverpool in the history of the Labour Party. It was a moment steeped in irony and paradox. She represents Riverside ward,
which includes Toxteth, Liverpool 8, the oldest urban black population in the world outside of Africa - predating the British Empire. Her election best defines this moment in the history of the
party, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, dogged throughout his tenure by the issue of anti-Semitism. Yet for all the attacks on him as a racist, it was under his leadership that for
the first time in the existence of the Party, this community and Liverpool elected a black MP. An even greater irony is that this was only possible after acrimonious developments in the local party
led to resignation of Louise Ellman, described by the Times of Israel as “an unabashed friend of Israel”. I hope that Kim’s contribution will be made available on social media as it best defines what
the focus this group should be.
Correctly, she highlighted the need to convert
the passive support for Labour at the polls into active membership of the party and the card membership of the trade union into active participation in its campaigns and leadership. This is the only
way to promote the fight to democratise the party and make it more representative of our needs.
On every measure the black and Asian
communities continue to suffer. The impact of racism and needing to second guess every encounter, personal or otherwise, to dissect whether the outcome would have been the same if you were white, is
the burden of racism that disproportionately affects the mental health of people of colour in the developed countries. These are the facts.
To transform the Labour Party and build on the
legacy of Bernie Grant and Diane Abbot it is necessary to campaign on these issues, using them to mobilise our communities and swell our numbers in the party. Anything else will end in
failure.
The Vacuum that is Labour
This pandemic has struck at the most unfortunate moment for the British Labour party and trade union
movement. Knee deep in the shifting sands of a three-way leadership contest, with flags flying in all directions and no candidate taking any chances and stating a clear direction.
The Corbyn leadership, hamstrung by a shortening shelf life, chose correctly to concentrate on the rights
of workers. The focus has been on trying to ease the burden on the least able in our society – supporting them to cope with the fallout from containing the virus. Many working people in Britain
today, exactly like those in the developing world, live a hand to mouth existence. They are one wage payment ahead of disaster with no savings and a limited personal safety net. This is the true
definition of wage slavery and is a sad indictment for the 6th largest economy in the world. This is also the reality for a large section of the Party’s base, making pressing the government to
safeguard workers, as well as businesses, a vital task at this moment.
With all of this going on the hapless Conservative government sighs a sense of relief.
On 31 Dec 2019 China was forced to report to the WHO a new deadly and highly contagious virus capable of
triggering a pandemic. UK government public health scientists were placed on high alert to the unfolding dangers. Soon after the full details of the virus, its epidemiology, genetic code, infection
characteristics and well-rehearsed containment procedures were communicated to all governments and the world watched. Semi-autonomous Hong Kong, City state Singapore and South Korea in the region
responded immediately to China’s lead with the result: far lower transmission and consequently fewer deaths despite being closer and more connected to the then epicentre of the outbreak.
The attention paid by the international community to the affairs of the UK shifted from drama and
amusement at its parliament over Brexit, to alarm and shock horror at the announcement of Boris Johnson on the 12th March 2020 “many families will lose loved ones before their time” .
The UK government and paid scientists turned their backs on the experiences of Asia and the WHO and
constructed an approach contrary to every other government and scientific community grappling with the issue. The UK government was not ordering the closures of schools or the cancellation of large
public events and provided no extension to testing to meet the soaring need.
Even, a sceptical Donald Trump went even further than our government; doing the right thing for the wrong
reason, by controlling international travel. Boris Johnson announced that the UK would pursue a Herd Immunity Strategy.
The announcement led to head shaking disbelief and anger for two main reasons. Firstly, on a purely PR
level, the language used was a nightmare. Though a valid scientific term, herd immunity is cold and scientific. As the people of the UK deciphered that “they” were the herd, they felt dehumanised and
discarded, like the culling of a herd of livestock. The second reaction was one of horror from experienced scientists and epidemiologists across the globe. Herd Immunity is a key part of the
scientist’s lexicon and related specifically to how an infectious disease moves (or doesn’t) through a population. The key objections raised by experts was the price of achieving herd immunity
without a vaccine and limited knowledge of the virus. It was a price that the government had brushed off too easily, with Dominic Cummings neatly summarising the Government ‘s approach (which he of
course denies), “if that means some pensioners die, too bad”. The conservative party were also caught out by their inability to answer key questions about the capacity of the NHS and how exactly the
health service would be supported to cope with the impending tidal wave of virus suffering patients.
The Conservative Party was relaxed with the projection that up to 250,000 people could perish whilst
building the ‘herd immunity’. After all, sacrificing a couple of hundred thousand old and vulnerable people to keep the economy ticking was a price worth paying. The ridiculousness of the approach
lay not only in the cast iron certainty that it would cause more deaths and overwhelm an already overstretched health service, but it would precipitate even greater damage to the economy in the long
run, through prolonging the crisis.
The Conservative Party meanwhile cared most about trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. The small
state neo-liberal model is increasingly incapable of responding to any more than a minor disruption. To be able to deal effectively with the crisis, the Conservative Government has been forced to
ditch the religion of austerity, which has driven its approach over the last ten years in power. It was inches from requisitioning companies, labour and tools to produce equipment, such as
ventilators. Only the unintended consequence of forcing non-essential businesses to close saved it from doing so. As key sectors of the UK manufacturing base changed tack to focus on the
virus.
As infection rates escalated, France threatened to close its border to British people, and key
institutions, such as the Premier League, began taking decisions into their own hands. The effect of which was to force the government into a humiliating climb down.
Throughout this period there wasn’t a word from Labour and the Trade Union Movement; behaving as if they
are seated at the top table in a national unity government. When, in fact, with a huge Conservativer parliamentary majority, Labour were being treated like a mangy dog tied to the garden fence. At
this point it was crucial for the Labour Party to point out the distinction between listening to scientific evidence and government incompetence, driven by blind loyalty to business and the
economy.
It was as if The Tories, having seen the Tsunami building in Asia and Italy, and knowing the true state
of NHS after 10 years of neglect, threw their hand in the air -“nothing we can do here let’s move on, many will die, so what!”. Welcome to our brave new world outside the EU.
In the 11 days that followed this announcement there was hope that if the Labour party was otherwise
engaged with its leadership niceties, the trade union leadership, whose members would be in the frontline bearing the brunt of the repercussions of this misguided policy, would wheel into action to
stop this madness - not a whisper. For many years now the leadership of our trade unions has been opaque. Declining membership has weakened these once omnipotent instruments of workers
aspirations.
Regardless, it does not explain why they have not defended their workers in the NHS. The people who are
bearing much of the brunt of the government’s original misjudged strategy and who are struggling with a constant flow of critically ill patients, without access to testing or, in many cases,
appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).
The Labour Party has a unique means by which they can approach this crisis, one which the Tories could
not hope to match. The Labour Party is capable of elevating the words of frontline staff through a potentially powerful Trade Union movement. With its unique structure, the party can have advance
notice of upcoming and ongoing issues on the ground. This can and has already caught the government out. The Tories lack an organic connection to the working class. They only seek this connection at
election season and, as such, have no way to process the concerns of the working class. Through elevating the concerns of front-line workers onto the agenda, combining these sentiments with
scientists and experts, many of whom take seriously their responsibility to the health of the general public, and combining this into an opposition force -all the Party would have to do, is get out
of its own way.
There is a conundrum at the heart of Labour party. The right wing, with Kier Starmer riding in on his
newly groomed steed, is eager to throw away the last eight years and continue where Blair left off. Unfortunately for him, events have left him behind. Liberals and Tory governments, acting with
neo-liberal zeal, have imposed crippling cuts in the state budget and allowed the market to literally loot the state in the aftermath of the 2008 recession. To everyone in Britain including its Tory
architects the narrative of austerity has run its course. This is obvious to all except Project Labour, who close their eyes to the decline of social democracy all over Europe. As workers mete out
punishment to those embracing the neo-liberal agenda - France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Holland offer vivid examples.
Starmer and his acolytes will turn their backs on the workers agenda by rejecting Jeremy Corbyn’s
manifesto commitments of house building and renationalisation of public services. They are doing so at precisely the same time as these policies are being embraced by the Tories, in an attempt to
keep the northern workers that put Boris in power. They are doing so at time when the weakness of our public services has been exposed like never before.
How will an establishment figure like Kier Starmer attract back the 62 northern seats that defected to
Boris? By promising to return Britain to the EU as soon as possible when we have not yet left? By not challenging, over the past few weeks, the ruthless disregard for the safety of the public of a
Government more interested in profit than people?
Central to the paralysis of the Left is the issue of Europe. In common with the right wing of the party,
left members are overwhelmingly pro-European and for an even wider range of issues. Where the left has an advantage over the right is that it is not deluded by the scale of the challenge to win back
the north. What is of concern, however, is that the left is not challenging existing neo-liberal EU priorities, which place business interests over the interests of citizens.
This was further laid bare last week in the hasty abandonment of Freedom of Movement (FOM) by the EU when
Covid-19 struck. What was all the posturing about the Irish backstop if the rules, supposedly cast in stone, can be so readily dismissed when their own social stability is at risk. A similar action
by the EU to suspend, rather than terminate FOM, when David Cameron went cap in hand, would have avoided a leave judgement from the people of the UK.
Every socialist dreams of a united socialist Europe. Another Europe is possible from the one which we
have now, and which is much the same as the old. FOM under the current conditions is not a socialist demand it is requirement of the bosses and has been rejected by the 62 constituencies of the
North.
The left needs to come to terms with the fact that the European Union does not work for large sections of
natural labour supporters who rejected the party at the last election.
We must never support reactionary ideas or turn our backs on huge battalions of our ranks. Crucially, we
cannot leave them behind in the lap of reactionaries like Steve Bannon, the Alt right and Victor Orban who has built a naked dictatorship under their noses and with their money. Orban and his
government could not be in power without EU financial support. It must be a seminal acceptance of the Left that Neo liberal globilsation is not working for significant sections of the old industrial
working class. They have been jettisoned for short sighted lower production costs abroad and the shrinking state provision at home through austerity. It is only from this vantage point that a
coherent position on Europe can be developed.
The immediate opportunities for the left in the British Labour party are obvious. Though battered and
bruised by the election defeat 2019, a significant force still exists within the party and in the PLP. A glance at the CLP endorsements for RLB provides a powerful reminder of its residual strength.
Within the urban centres, the Black and Asian communities together with the youth who have decamped from the surrounding towns have reinforced the local working classes and progressive middle class
to become an impressive citadel against the Tories.
These are Black and Asian communities who have watched a lopsided debate on racism play out within the
party from the side-lines for the last 3 years. Is there a hierarchy of racism in the party? Why isn’t the continuing experience of Black and minority ethnic communities given the same attention as
the issue of anti-Semitism?
The current unprecedented times, when the perilous state of our public services and the precarious lives
of the majority of UK workers, has been highlighted in beaming fluorescent lights. The left must unite and challenge Starmer and his Blair impersonating acolytes to, quite literally, fight for our
lives. High on our list of demands must be:
Properly funded public services
Reclaim the cities for the people not the property developers
Build more social housing & control over private landlords
Fight for social justice against racism in employment / education / law / immigration
Implement environmental and pollution control policies
Unionise gig workers
Keir Starmer ascends to power today in very similar circumstances to which Neil Kinnock did in October of
1983, following a bruising defeat of a Left led by Michael Foot. In a follow up article, we will examine the parallels between our 2019 campaign and the failure to learn from the 80s experience.
Keir Starmer must be reminded of this period.
Ushered in with the same reforming zeal to move the party towards electability. The Party under Kinnock, to its
shame, sat on its hands while Thatcher and the state bludgeoned the miners and their families in a year long strike. When he audaciously addressed the Miners Gala at the end of the strike a
noose was lowered over his head from the gallery above, such was the anger.
Sensing her opportunity with the weakness of Kinnock’s leadership, Thatcher pressed on relentlessly with the Poll
Tax. Leaderless, bloodied but unbowed this galvanised the biggest people’s campaign since the 1945 and finally brought an end to Thatcher’s rule. All the while Kinnock did nothing in an
attempt to look “electable” – take note Sir Kier.
Filled with contempt for her adversary, Thatcher herself mocked his undeniably fine oratory dubbing him the “Welsh
Windbag”. The electorate did the same; he lost both of the elections in which he led the ‘respectable’ Labour party. This being despite the fact that the UK was on its knees and whole
sections of society were being ransacked by a rampant Conservative Government.
Any talk of national unity is a trap laid by Dominic Cummins to escape the blame and mask the Tory failure to
support our NHS and other public services over the last 10 years.
Don’t fall for it!!
Print 