Close the door on your way out
Discussion of the report of the Irish Labour Party's 21st Century Commission into the future of the Party has been deferred until next March, for understandable reasons. We in the Northern Ireland Constituency Council have had the section of the report on Northern Ireland leaked to us. The Commission is not recommending that Labour stand for election in NI - even if the SDLP were to merge with Fianna Fáil. A separate Commission was also examining the position of Labour in Northern Ireland, and NI members of that body have received a letter from Eamon Gilmore confirming the position set out below.
So it's no. Not now. Not ever. Go away. I'll be writing about why this is mistaken next week on Irish Left Review.
21st Century Commission Section 8: Labour and the island of Ireland
Historically, the Labour Party is an all island organisation. Labour was also organised in the north by stalwarts such as Paddy Devlin of the Northern Ireland Labour Party and Gerry Fitt of Republican Labour. Today we share the same philosophical views with the SDLP, our sister party in the Party of European Socialists.
Indeed one indication of how closely aligned are our aims and objectives is found in Mark Durkan’s speech to our 2006 conference. Taking as his theme the 90th anniversary of the Proclamation of Independence, he reminded his audience that up to one child in three in this country – North and South – still live in poverty, many in extreme poverty. He asked: “Can all parties North and South not join in a democratic covenant that by 2016 we will truly have fulfilled the 1916 Proclamation’s commitment to treat all the children of the Nation equally?”
Such a covenant would entail:
· A community where no child is ever left behind because of disability, or left out because of colour
· A Nation where to be a child of Ireland does not have to mean a child of Irish parents
· A society where parents of an autistic child do not have to research, lobby and petition various service providers as though they are the first
· A culture where young women are safer on our streets and young men are safer on our roads
· An island where children and their families will be protected against persecution and prejudice as well as poverty
· An economy that invests in the skills and values the talents of all young people including those with learning disabilities
· A country whose services and systems, laws and budgets truly proclaim “Every Child is our Child”.
This is of course very similar to the covenant we set out in Chapter 1 of this report. We should seek to work with our sister Party in Northern Ireland to achieve these aims across the island by 2016.
In marked contrast to many European democracies where issues of economics, social equality and class became of paramount importance, the politics of Ireland in general and Northern Ireland in particular after 1922 was dominated by the War of Independence and the subsequent partition of Ireland. In Northern Ireland this created in effect nationalist and unionist Labour Parties, deriving support from their respective communities but with little political strength. The unionist dominance in Stormont had, in any event, turned Northern Ireland into a virtual one party state. Under its watch, and with the acquiescence of Westminster, sectarian discrimination against the nationalist minority in the workplace prevailed.
All of this, in time, became explosive. It eventually erupted in the 1960s with the civil rights movement, the Orange opposition, Stormont intransigence, the arrival of politically motivated violence and the imposition of direct rule from London.
The Social Democratic and Labour Party emerged from the civil rights movement with the help and support of the Irish Labour Party. Brendan Corish, then Labour Leader, encouraged old Northern Labour stalwarts like Paddy Devlin and Gerry Fitt to link up with the newly elected civil rights Stormont MPs John Hume, Paddy O’Hanlon and Ivan Cooper. The original constitution of the SDLP was modelled on that of the Irish Labour Party. In addition the Irish Labour Party, which still had a small political organisation north of the border, a remnant of its establishment in 1912, instructed all its members to join the new SDLP. Labour sponsored the SDLP for membership of the Socialist International and subsequently for what is now the Party of European Socialists.
More recently, after the Assembly elections in 2007, the DUP and Sinn Féin emerged as the dominant parties of the unionist and nationalist communities. This, together with an announcement by Fianna Fáil that it intended to organise in the North, exasperated (sic) anxieties within the SDLP as to its future role in Northern Ireland politics. It appeared that significant numbers within the party, particularly outside Belfast, would have seen such a move as a lifeline for their organisation.
The problem for the SDLP was that any move to link with Fianna Fáil might have resulted in the party splitting between those who favour an all-island nationalist party, with a “catch all” appeal, and those whose preference is for a party with a strong commitment to social democracy.
What should the Labour Party’s response be to events in Northern Ireland? Should the Irish Labour Party follow Fianna Fáil and consider organising in the North?
Our first response to these questions is that they are not at all as immediate as they were when Commission 21 was established. The Fianna Fáil “threat” to the SDLP’s viability has been removed: it now appears that plans to organise in Northern Ireland are no longer a priority and have been postponed indefinitely.
In addition, the SDLP itself has rediscovered a strong voice and a message for its constituency. That voice and message were most recently heard in the speech given by Mark Durkan to the British Irish Association meeting in Oxford in September this year.
As politics develops in NI and the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement are bedded down, the old issues between unionists and nationalists will be replaced by the same sort of issues that confront government and public administration in any modern society. And hopefully the institutions of the Agreement will adapt accordingly. The SDLP Leader has argued that, at the time of the negotiation of the Good Friday Agreement, the system of designation of Assembly members as nationalist or unionist was “necessary because of what we were coming from but should not be necessary where we are going”. These measures had sectarian or sectional undertones and should be bio-degradable, dissolving in the future as the environment changed.
As we move towards a fully sealed and settled process we should be preparing to think about how and when to remove some of the ugly scaffolding needed during the construction of the new edifice….
If we are serious about a truly shared future then we have to allow for truly shared politics where parties can – and have to – appeal across the traditional divides. The fault-line in our society will still be there but it should not determine the party political cleavage for future generations.
[these are extracts from Durkan’s speech – not clear in the original document]
In the interim, however, the reality remains that Northern Ireland is not a fully normalised society. Under the Agreement, elections are contested between parties designated as either nationalist or unionist and they draw their support accordingly. Until some of this “ugly scaffolding” is removed – and that can be done only by those who agreed to erect it – we are not at all convinced that parties based in either Dublin or London have any real or significant contribution to make to Northern Ireland politics by organising there – and adopting one or other of those labels for the purpose.
Effectively, this would require Labour to opt for adherence to – and to seek votes exclusively from – just one of the two traditions, would split the existing progressive vote and would risk unsettling the present balance between the parties.
We are also far from convinced that there is any real demand at present within the North itself for a single, all-Ireland social democratic party, as opposed to the strengthening of links between the two existing parties.
The Irish Labour Party’s approach is determined by two major considerations. The first arises from our membership of the PES and the fact that we and the SDLP are sister parties in the social democratic tradition. The should, in our view and that of the PES, be a vibrant local PES party in Northern Ireland, capable of maintaining a clear electoral presence and with the capacity to win seats at local, Stormont, Westminster and European level.
If the SDLP, in whole or in part, chooses at some future stage to merge or create formal links with Fianna Fáil then it would automatically lose its membership of the PES. In all likelihood, in those circumstances a potion of SDLP members would decline to follow the party into such a merger or alliance. It would then be important that we, along with the British Labour Party, ensure that the social democratic and labour movement is adequately represented in Northern Ireland politics. Under the Statutes of the PES it would be possible for the new party to allow for dual membership for Northern Ireland members. Accordingly, an activist could be a member of the new party and the Irish or British Labour Party. Such a provision could accommodate the dual community identity (“British or Irish or both”) that remains at the heart of the Good Friday Agreement.
Our second major consideration derives from our own history and convictions. Labour is a party that is both Irish and republican and that aspires to a shared, 32 county future. However, we recognise the reality that, even with most guns silenced, for most of the time, Northern Ireland remains a bitterly divided society and in danger of becoming ever more so. There is more and more evidence of a hardening of separateness between both communities, of a society that is becoming more divided by tribal identifications. Parallel with efforts to maintain functioning political institutions, we need a real effort on all sides to tackle the sectarian divisions that have increased rather than diminished since the Good Friday Agreement of 1998.
A devolved government and assembly may contribute to normalisation but, of themselves, they cannot provide a comprehensive solution. We all of us need to address rather than exacerbate the structural divisions within Northern Ireland. Where people live, for example, where they send their children to school. These are the immediate challenges we all face in resolving conflict, combating sectarianism and establishing reconciliation between all people in the North.
We are convinced, therefore, that every Irish nationalist who wants to unite this country must recognise as a task for themselves the need to address rather than exacerbate the structural divisions [word missing from scan] and in particular within Northern Ireland. [some repetition here but reproduced as in the original.] After all, if your vision of a republic cannot include – and instead insists on the defeat of – your political opponents, then it is not a true republic at all. At its most basic, a “republic” denotes public property which is owned in common by, and attracts the allegiance of, all citizens.
For that we need a new accommodation, a new framework and a new form of words, if we are to continue the unfinished project of nation-building.
Both Labour and the SDLP need to work together. We cannot accept as adequate a stasis with nothing better to hope for than separate provision, separate development and a parity of esteem that is exclusively grounded on a sectarian headcount. We need instead a framework that embraces the diverse origins and traditions, ethnic, historical, political and spiritual, of all our people. We need to acknowledge, accommodate and celebrate the fact that we have a rich variety of social and cultural heritages on this island and that neither glorious achievement nor suffering, trial and struggle are the particular preserve of any of our forebears or any of our histories.
That is the national struggle for 21st century Ireland.
Eamon Gilmore, as leader of the Labour Party, should, as a priority, work with Mark Durkan to forge a common policy platform along similar lines to those being proposed against child poverty in the Republic. This common platform should be developed into a common commitment by both parties to be delivered by 2016.
Both parties should commit themselves to working together to develop and deliver the policies and others [sic] consistent with the goals and objectives that define our parties.
The Northern Ireland electorate must continue to have the opportunity to vote for a social democratic party such as the SDLP. We – and indeed our sister parties throughout Europe – are committed to ensuring that there will continue to be a member party from Northern Ireland within the PES.
The relationship between our parties is grounded on a mutual acknowledgement of our different situations and a mutual respect for each other’s autonomy. But there are strong and enduring links between us, based on friendship, solidarity and philosophy. We should work together to make those links more visible, to our members and to the island as a whole.
Update:
See Garibaldy's comments in full here.
24 comments:
Quelle surprise.
I wonder how the ex-DL people feel, having been abandoned by Gilmore et al for the second time.
Of course, after decades condemning the SDLP as a sectarian political organisation, the southern DLers told the northern ones to join the SDLP. I guess though times have changed, and nominal membership of the Irish Labour Party will be maintained. That's progress for you.
Garibaldy - I've linked your post to mine, as it makes some good points at greater length, including of course the question of where we'll all go now. I think there won't be any difference between the ex-DL members and the rest of us - I get the impression that no-one wants to continue their membership.
Personally I wouldn't want to join the British LP as I think the same thing will happen to them a few years down the line. Also the idea of a NI-only LP has been tried before - plus I don't think we in the irish LP have enough time and resources to start our own party. There is, though, the wider question of our democratic deficit, which I'll return to at some point.
The document is exceedingly bizarre in its approach, as you have noted and as I'll discuss once I've written up my notes for ILR this weekend. Still, it must be nice for the SDLP to get a love letter as they don't get many nowadays.
Thanks Jenny. I'm looking forward to your extended piece in the ILR. I hope the people involved won't be lost to local politics as we need all the progressive voices we can get.
We'll see - personally, I don't intend to jump into anything else in a hurry, will stick to blogging!
Fair enough. Has this really come as a huge shock to all involved, or was there more hope of being able to stand in elections than expectation?
I think we've known that it was unlikely since Eamon Gilmore became leader, and particularly since the Wexford confernece last year. But I suppose we'd hoped they would give it a go, particularly as we were only asking to stand in local elections and not for the Assembly, and if nothing else it would have given Mark Langhammer a chance to get back into electoral politics. So yes, the feeling was definitely hope over experience.
Thanks. Langhammer is a decent guy, and stood up for himself and his values. I'll be interested to see what happens with that.
Jenny on your blog a few years ago you made predictions for NI politics in 5 years time. You said
SDLP/FF
UUP/Conservative
DUP-still the same
SF-still the same
Alliance
and
Labour (some kind of option, involving one both or neither Irish and UK parties)
The first of these seems to have been decided against, the second has this week been moved forward while Irish Labour appear to have stopped any further progress.
UK labour now DOES allow formal organisation in NI - boyd Black spoke at conference - and a seat on the NEC but not elections.
Surely in the case of UK Labour there is a powerful logic to have some arrangement allowing people to vote for UK Labour MPs to Westminster --- after all they are one of two viable parties capable of decicing things like tax and foreign policy and NI now looks set to have the Conservative option?
As for the decision of Irish Labour, does this not leave the Alliance party as an option? I know its not exactly left wing but it is progressive as Tony Blair pointed out. I suspect some of the NI Labour support and members went that way when NI Labour disappeared.
Howard
Wouldn't a few more Labour seats (in NI) make a difference in the case of a hung parliament?
Anon - yes, that post of mine needs updating! But you state:
'UK labour now DOES allow formal organisation in NI - boyd Black spoke at conference - and a seat on the NEC but not elections.'
That is the same position we're on with Irish Labour - we had Mark Langhammer on the NEC and also several members have spoken at conferences. But I predict that the crunch for yourselves (I assume you're a member) will be the same as for us - if you push to stand in elections. It seems as if both Labour parties have a very dated and (pardon the pun) rose-tinted view of the SDLP, and don't realise that it's impossible to support tham if you're not a nationalist.
I would find it hard to join Alliance because I have such a long history of being in a Socialist International party, I woudl feel a fraud. But you're right, they have some good policies and have taken the lead on diversity in a very impressive way.
Wilted Rose - the answer is yes, but I don't think this would be enough to take NI out of the 'too hard' box for British Labour.
No chance of there being any Labour MPs, and the SDLP votes with them anyway, so they effectively are Labour nearly 100% of the time. There is no evidence that Labour standing would mean they pick up their voters, or that they could take some from the Provos.
Garibaldy - I suspect (and have suspected for a long time, if I'm honest) that the building of a non-sectarian democratic socialist party in NI is a long-term project. I'm not sure I have the energy for it, frankly.
Jenny,
I couldn't agree more - it is indeed a long term project, and not at all an easy one. I think that given the current state of the left, we need to cooperate more. The quickest - and that is
still a project decades long - way to build a progressive profile is probably something along the lines of the united community group, expanded beyond Stormont, possibly with some sacrifice on leftism to make it as broad a coalition as possible. As you suggest, being on the left in NI is a depressing experience. I guess we must take inspiration from Lenin thinking he had come to Switzerland to die in 1915, and hope for a similarly unlikely turnaround.
Hmmm, not sure Lenoin would be my model - but then Gramsci is too depressing!
Agree there needs to be a broad 'left' front (in reality it woudl be left to centre left), and one possibility when (or if) we wind up the Northern LP branch will be a conference on that very subject.
The Lenin thing was a bit mischevious. As for Gramsci, if there was ever a situation for pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will, being a socialist in NI is certainly it.
Any new left coalition should certainly have the cradle to the grave model as its agreed programme, along with anti-sectarianism.
I was pleased to see Darling offer a tax increase, even if only 1% of the population will be affected.
Yes, the frustrating thing about the position we're in in NI is that it's a good time to be debating the role of the state, given that certain interventions such as tax increases and public subsidy are becoming fashionable again.
I hope we do get to organise something when I'm back, given the time it takes to organise it will most likely be around Easter. Your idea of cradle to grave plus non-sectarian is a great framework, I would add some kind of equality statement to that, although it could be included in the non-sectarian perspective.
I agree. we should be pushing at an open door in NI, given the level of state involvement in the economy, and yet still people can't see their own interests.
What do you mean by equality statement? I think maybe a strong Bill of Rights would certainly do the job, and that shouldn't be pushing it for any progressive coalition. I think too I prefer the term anti-sectarian to non-sectarian. It suggests an active opposition as opposed to neutrality.
I think whatever kind of equality statement there might be, it should focus on individual rather than group rights. But like you, I think the rights element of a Left coalition would be the easy bit - with the exception perhaps of workers' rights. I would see far more disagreement on economic issues, even at the moment.
Also agree anti-sectarianism is a better term, as non-sectarian can imply it doesn't exist and that's a big challenge for any kind of inclusive coalition - acknowledge that the elephant is in the room and that we can all see it.
I've been involved in the ILP at many levels for a long time and while you would have an uphill battle convincing the party leadership to take on the SDLP and engage much of the wider membership, you should retain your toehold in the party membership.
While the ILP should not be the core focus for all your activities, Mark remaining an NEC member is valuable and a good way of keeping an all Ireland input into the party organisation.
Your characterisation of the British & Irish Labour Parties classing NI as being "too hard" is correct, but by not exploiting the small toe holds that do exist since 2002/3 and walking away, you let those parties off the hook and think that everything can be dealt with on a six county basis.
Any such project is decade long by nature. One thing I am sure of is that the likes of Ruairi Quinn will not be around in a few years with the emotional attachment he has for the SDLP. The entire commission was a mess and the deferral of the report just shows what a failure the project was.
There will be a big generational shift in the ILP in 5-10 years and I am sure that the younger generation will be far more sympathetic to your aims.
Better to take another shot at your original strategy of putting the issue in its own right to the floor of the conference (which was your strategy in summer 2007). The next suitable opportunity might be conference after next when there is no commission report to distract or sideline you.
Remember 50 to 60 year old parliamentarians are the hardest group of people to persuade - most of them will be gone in an election or two and their replacements born in the 1970s and 80s will not have any affinity with the SDLP - seeing it as a middle class party in the FF/FG mode
Anon- your position is tempting, as I have an emotional commitment to being in a Labout party rather than in any other, and have been for most of my adult life. But I do think it makes little sense to continue to be in a party that doesn't include electoral activity. This of course dones't preclude rejoining if the time seems right again.
Howard writes...
Surely a solution is to develop a Northern Ireland Labour Party which affiliates both to Irish Labour and to UK Labour? Similar to the Alliance-Lib Dem and UUP-Conservative arrangements, and similar if not exactly the same to what the NI Greens do. NI is somewhat different from GB and from the Republic - there is a local polotical dynamic and local political issues as well as the important national ones - so there will always need to be a local party organisation that has a lot of autonomy. On this I don't agree with Mark's dismissal as "soda farl labour". A local party which agrees a Westminster manifesto with the London party and a European manifesto with the Dublin and London parties is surely a sensible way forward.
The problem being Howard, that neither the British nor Irish Labour parties want any real connection with the north.
"Anon- your position is tempting, as I have an emotional commitment to being in a Labout party rather than in any other, and have been for most of my adult life."
Fair enough Jenny, I respect that. A party that is not electoral is as useful as a torch without a bulb - but don't throw the torch out!
There are plenty of ILP people favourably disposed towards you, that said a Dublin resident can't never make the same impact as regards your views as a member based in the party organisation in Belfast.
You know in your heart and soul the SDLP is not sustainable and without its continuance the two Labour Parties will be forced to fill the PES gap - even if NI is in the "too hard" box.
Keep the Faith
Best wishes
ILP Anon
Howard - I'm coming round to the idea that NI needs some kind of different Labour structure, but as Garibaldy says, it's hampered by the view from both Dublin and London that the slot is filled adequately by the SDLP. A sustainable solution would require a commitment from both parties that just isn't there. I've thought about whether a seperate party in the solution, or indeed the continuation of the court route by Andy McGivern, but I don't do politics full time and for the next few years am going to have to concentrate on my job a bit more.
As I don't want to move away from NI, I have actually decided that I'm going to support BOTH the Greens and Alliance as appropriate but not join either, until such a time as we get proper Labour representation. Of course I'll take part in any campaigns to this end, but won't try to start a campaign myself.
And thanks for your kind words, anon, I'm sure our day will come.
Post a Comment