To be sure, the defence spending cuts motion passed
last Thursday by Labour conference was poorly drafted and vague – but then so
were most of the motions debated last week. And, to be sure, there is something
rather absurd about the way Labour conference makes decisions, with frantic
lobbying of union delegations behind the scenes counting for more than the
debate itself.
But the fact remains that Labour conference did decide
last week to advocate cutting British defence spending to the west European
average, and it is perfectly reasonable to ask how the Labour leadership can
dismiss that decision in such a cavalier fashion. After all, it is perfectly
happy to accept the legitimacy of conference decisions when they go its way,
however ambiguously worded the motions. If conference decisions are acceptable
only when they are in tune with leadership thinking, the notion that
conference is there to decide policy becomes meaningless.
Labour's leaders must learn that they have to take
the rough with the smooth. If they are worried about the ambiguity of the
motion, they should be looking at ways of ironing out the ambiguity, not
announcing that they will ignore the conference vote when drawing up the
manifesto.
Alternative economics
If there is an alternative to the pro-austerity
Euro-social-democracy currently advocated by Labour, it is not the package on
offer from the group of left-wing economists, trade unionists and politicians
which was advertised in Tribune a fortnight ago and is endorsed by Ken
Livingstone this week.
Much of what they say is unexceptionable: on
training, low pay, defence diversification and international economic
co-operation, the differences with Labour policy are of degree rather than of
kind. Where they part company is in advocating devaluation, exchange controls
and nationalisation – the meat and potatoes of the Alternative Economic
Strategy of the seventies minus the import controls.
The problems with all this are multiple, but the
most important is that there is no reason to believe that an essentially
national economic programme can possibly work for a medium-sized country in the
modern world. Capital is increasingly mobile and the main effect of Britain
attempting to carry out a national alternative economic strategy would simply
be to scare it away.
Instead of putting forward a nostalgic vision of
plucky little socialist Britain standing alone, possibly outside the exchange
rate mechanism of the European Monetary System, the left should be exploring
the possibilities for European alternative
economic strategies. The fact that this task is more demanding intellectually
than recycling yesterday's panaceas is no reason to shirk it.
New technology at last
This is the first issue of Tribune to be
produced entirely on desktop publishing equipment. Our thanks to everyone who
made it possible by giving generously to our appeal. Tribune will be back to 12 pages a week just as soon as we have
mastered the new kit – which should be before the end of the year.