Bennett finished fourth, behind Labour, the Liberals and the Conservatives, pushing the Greens (604 votes or 3.8%) into fifth place. This reversed the result in the May elections, when the Green Party outscored the LSA by 3-1.

Labour Party candidate David Lammy won more than 50% of the vote in a constituency which is overwhelmingly working class and where half the voters are black. Although creditable, the LSA vote was lower than thought possible by some socialist activists, given the widespread disillusion with PM Tony Blair's “New Labour”.

A number of factors reduced the LSA vote. The election, caused by the death of well-known black Labour MP Bernie Grant, was called by Labour as a “snap election”, allowing the LSA only two and a half weeks to campaign.

There was strong pressure by black community leaders to ensure that Lammy, a black barrister, was elected. This was argued on the basis of the necessity of having a black MP who could “help” the local community. In fact, this argument revealed strong elements of clientalism and patronage in the relationship between some community leaders and the Labour Party.

Another factor was the simple fact that the LSA is a very new political force and had to fight against an enormous mobilisation by the Labour Party, which sent dozens of MPs into the constituency for the campaign.

Following its strong showing in the May London Assembly election, the London Socialist Alliance (LSA) scored well in the June 22 parliamentary by-election in the north London seat of Tottenham. LSA candidate Weyman Bennett won 885 votes, or 5.2%.

Bennett finished fourth, behind Labour, the Liberals and the Conservatives, pushing the Greens (604 votes or 3.8%) into fifth place. This reversed the result in the May elections, when the Green Party outscored the LSA by 3-1.

Labour Party candidate David Lammy won more than 50% of the vote in a constituency which is overwhelmingly working class and where half the voters are black. Although creditable, the LSA vote was lower than thought possible by some socialist activists, given the widespread disillusion with PM Tony Blair's "New Labour".

A number of factors reduced the LSA vote. The election, caused by the death of well-known black Labour MP Bernie Grant, was called by Labour as a "snap election", allowing the LSA only two and a half weeks to campaign.

There was strong pressure by black community leaders to ensure that Lammy, a black barrister, was elected. This was argued on the basis of the necessity of having a black MP who could "help" the local community. In fact, this argument revealed strong elements of clientalism and patronage in the relationship between some community leaders and the Labour Party.

Another factor was the simple fact that the LSA is a very new political force and had to fight against an enormous mobilisation by the Labour Party, which sent dozens of MPs into the constituency for the campaign.

Lastly, there was the traditional pro-Labour reflex among many black and working-class voters, at a time when the Conservative leader William Hague is whipping up an enormous racist campaign around the issue of immigration and asylum seekers. This exposed the Green Party as having nothing coherent to say on the issue.

Nonetheless, more than 5% for a new left political formation represents a considerable success in Britain and will encourage plans to stand a national Socialist Alliance slate in the general election expected next year.

The Tottenham by-election came a couple of weeks after the June 11 conference of the LSA, attended by 400 activists. The conference discussed the outcome of the London-wide election and future activities, and elected a 30-person steering committee.

The conference demonstrated an enormous desire for united action among the usually fractious far-left organisations. The pro-unity mood has been strongly promoted by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), the largest revolutionary socialist organisation in Britain. Only the Socialist Party (formerly Militant Labour) stood against the mood for unity, accusing the SWP of trying to dominate the LSA.

The SP argued that an attempt to run the LSA by consensus between the different trends - something universally accepted - should mean that any group could veto decisions. In other words, the SP argued that it should have a veto over any decision, giving it the right to disrupt the LSA any time it chooses.

Given that the SWP asked for just four places on the 30-person committee, the SP accusations about "SWP manipulation" fell flat. Not surprisingly, in the votes on organisational questions, only SP members backed the SP positions. For most activists at the conference, the SP's antics were merely mildly irritating, a temper tantrum by a once-important but now marginal organisation.

The most important decision of the conference was to make the LSA a membership organisation that individuals can join directly, rather than just through affiliated far-left groups. The significance of this is that the LSA can now recruit a substantial membership beyond the existing far-left, with the objective of making the LSA politically and organisationally much more than the sum of its parts. The Tottenham and London elections have both shown that this process is well under way.

BY PHIL HEARSE

Tools

• Bookmark This Page
• Print This Page