With a (Labour) rebel yell!
©HarpyMarx
The other week, I wrote an article outlining what happened in the final session of Socialism 2009, which (for me) was a discussion about which way forward for the Left; a new workers’ party or re-entering the Labour Party. Readers may remember my disbelief at Mike Davies, one of the panellists invited by the Socialist Party. I reported as follows:
Mike Davies of the Alliance for Green Socialism spoke next, and in my view completely departed from reality. In Mike’s own words, he declared “a vote for any Labour MP is a vote for New Labour.’ When question time rolled around, I queried this from the floor; “I’d like to ask Mike is he serious when he tells us not to vote for Labour MPs like John McDonnell, who have campaigned for years on climate change and the Heathrow runway, and who have never done anything except vote against New Labour?”
Davies flatly denied my assertion that John McDonnell (and I would add Jeremy Corbyn) voted against New Labour. ‘Left Labour MPs have had the odd rebellion’ he said, “They have never voted against New Labour’s project”. Indeed Davies went further into bananaland – “The existence of Left Labour MPs creates the myth that there is room for the Left in Labour”. No reader of the blog can be ignorant of the fact that actually several Labour MPs have been consistent rebels throughout the last three parliaments.
While purging the blogroll of all the inactives on it, I came across the following gem from Revolt: a record of Labour rebellions against the whip during the fourth session of this parliament and some sundry details about the 2005-2010 Parliament as a whole.
* Labour MPs defied their whips on 74 occasions, a rebellion in 30 percent of divisions, exactly the same as the preceding session’s figure.
* The Parliament as a whole is currently averaging a rate of 27 percent, on course to become the most rebellious in the post-war era. The current record is 21 percent, set by the 2001 Parliament.
* In absolute terms, that record has already been achieved; the 2005 Parliament has already seen more revolts against the whip by members of the governing party than any other post-war parliament.
* A total of 102 Labour MPs voted against their whips during the session; the total number of Labour rebels under Brown now stands at 137.
* Rebellion remains concentrated amongst a small group of Labour MPs. The top ten rebels in the 2008-09 session accounted for marginally under half (46%) of the total rebellious votes cast; the top 20 rebels accounted for exactly two-thirds (66%) of the total.
* John McDonnell took the top spot as the most rebellious Labour MP in the fourth session, clocking up 46 dissenting votes.
* He was closely followed by Jeremy Corbyn on 45. Corbyn’s total number of votes against the whip for the Brown administration alone has now passed the 100 mark, with more than 400 in total since 1997.
* The government suffered two defeats during the session as a result of its backbenchers defying the whip – on Gurkhas and Parliamentary Standards.
And one fact not in the paper: The Parliament as a whole has now seen six defeats, caused by backbench dissent, on whipped votes. No Parliament with a majority of over 60 has seen this many defeats in the post-war era.
Outstanding. The evidence cited here doesn’t prove that Labour can be retaken by the Left, but it does prove that supporting existing socialist MPs, in the Labour Party or out of it (and there aren’t any who aren’t Labour members, so far as I can recall), is vitally important. It keeps alive a Left voice in Parliament, to attack things like Heathrow expansion, public sector cuts, reinforced terror laws and the handcuffs on the trades unions that this government supports.
What we need to do is circulate figures like these more, so that voters can see just the extent to which New Labour often relies on the Tories to carry through their agenda. Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell might be part of a tiny minority, but the role they have played in trying to waken the unions and activists generally out of their despair to fight against the leadership is little short of heroic. They themselves don’t attempt to justify Labour’s policies or the undemocratic internal regime of the Party and should be applauded and supported come election time.
It is utterly vital that lefties canvass for MPs like McDonnell and Corbyn as these people, including others, have consistently fought against the vile ideology of neoliberlism and war mongering that NL has consistently adhered to.
Btw: The pic you have used of John McD. to advertise the post is one of mine don’t mind in the least you using it very pleased you are but can you credit me for the pic? That’s all. Many thanks.
Many thanks Dave, much appreciated.
I re-read the Mike Davies quote. How surreal! How can Davies maintain that McDonnell et al have not voted against the NL project. What about the Iraq war and the demand for inquiries, MPs like McDonnell and Corbyn were at the forefront leading the resistance. Totally politically signifcant. And how Davies can describe it as the ‘odd rebellion’ is beyond me. Another good example is the fantastic work John McD and Lynne Jones did over the Welfare Reform Bill, pushing amendments and arguing against the draconian Bill. Utterly weird that Davies thinks this…well not that weird I suppose ‘cos many on the left dismiss the Labour left and leftie MPs as if we haven’t achieved anything etc etc and should be outside the LP fighting the evils of NL.
And the LRC, talking of leftie MPs, made the decision to canvass for leftie MPs who have a track record of voting against NL. I will be spending my time in the new year in Hayes and Harlington and Islington as opposed to my own constituency as no way will I be canvassing for a NL clone! Can I just big-up Katy Clark… she has done brilliant work as well.
Mike Davies may be wrong but one potential problem with the counter-argument is that MPs like John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn are relatively easy to defend. But where should the line be drawn?
What about, say, Dagenham’s Jon Cruddus, who voted for the war in Iraq, foundation hospitals, ID cards and for the extension of detention without charge to 42 days? He is supposedly a ‘left’ MP, close to Compass? Or David Drew, who was against the war but very pro-ID cards and flim-flammed over anti-terror laws?
Leaving aside McDonnell, Corbyn Lynne Jones in Birmingham and Bob Wareing in Liverpool, few other MPs have a consistent record, which makes it all the more difficult not to see them as compromisers with the New Labour project, if not exactly enthusiasts.
Sounds like a parallel universe…..of ultra-left political stupidity.
The recent RMT conference on working-class representation exonerated JMcDonnell and JCorbyn but seemed to lump everyone else together as new labour clones. Which isn’t fair.
Up North we have Gordon Prentice, Mike Wood, Katy Clark, Ronnie Campbell etc etc
In fairness, at the RMT event, where I was heckled by the wilder fringes, I got an apology from someone on the Socialist Party exec
Kevin, the fact that John McDonnell and Jeremy Corbyn are relatively easy to defend is not a problem with the counter-argument to the idea that we shouldn’t support Labour MPs. It is in fact the crux of that argument.
If you want to talk about other MPs, everyone draws their own line somewhere; I personally wouldn’t campaign for anyone outside the LRC. Each activist can make their own mind up about that, but regardless, the example of Corbyn and McDonnell annihilate the idea that we should never vote Labour on principle – which was essentially what Mike Davies was saying.
Susan, in fairness you’ve been heckled on this blog too, and whilst it’s worse having it done in person – there’s just no call for incivility – a lot of people simply don’t want to hear from members of Labour who won’t leave, no matter the circumstances; a position which cuts them off from reasoned analysis.
Now if they Labour Party were a democratic centralist one…
What’s your point, Tom? If the Labour Party were a democratic centralist party, conference could remove the entire leadership at one stroke…
Tom
What does that mean?
Those of who think it’s strategically useful to stay within the Labour party are ‘heckled’ on this blog (or patronised, as on Third Estate) not because of an urge to incivility, though that may help, but because we haven’t yet successfully put our case as to why it’s best to stay within the Labour party.
John McDonnell as an individual has successfully put his case and had it accepted by all but the wildest fringes because it’s backed by evidence of his actions. The Labour left more generally can validly ask for patience while it provides its own evidence on why it’s best to stay in Labour, but it can’t ask for that patience for ever. As Dave suggests, lots of people have stopped listening at least for the time being.
Susan understands that of course, or she wouldn’t be seeking to organise regionally with the LRC, altough I’m less convinced than I would like to be of LRC branch organising as a more appropriate use of resource than simply operating within and around branches/CLPs (yes I know there’s an interrelation, but the emphasis is different.