Around 80 people attended the first meeting the CoR national Committee after November's founding conference.
There was a good spread of people there representing unions, local anti-cuts groups and political organisations. Among the participants was a representative for Unite General Secretary Len McCluskey. Unite has affiliated to CoR, which is a real boost for the organisation.Andrew Burgin from the Steering Committee also reported that a working relationship had been established with the Right to Work Campaign and the Peoples Charter, and that it was hoped that something similar could could be established with the National Shop Stewards Network. There was a real willingness to have the broadest possible unity against the cuts.
In terms of activity the chief subjects for discussion were the TUC march planned for 26 March and the week of action being planned for 14 to 20 February.
The meeting also discussed a number of amendments to the founding statement of the CoR which had been held over from the conference, some of these were controversial, some not.
In general , there was a refreshing sense of realism about what CoR could most effectively do - acting as a source of collective support and solidarity for people on the front line of fighting cuts. Only a small minority wanted to substitute CoR for the leadership of the trade union and student movement, and they were comprehensively outvoted.
Accordingly, CoR declared itself ready to support and give solidarity to strikes and occupations against cuts, including co-ordinated action, but avoided the temptation to start sloganising about general strikes (as proposed in one amendment) - a sure way to give the trade union bureaucrats an excuse to withhold support.
In a similar vein, another amendment, which seemed to want to tell students how to organise themselves (like they need anyone's advice!) was also voted down.
The meeting did vote unanimously to call upon councils not to implement cuts and promised support for councillors who voted against cuts.
The other thorny issue was whether CoR should encourage local anti-cuts campaigns to stand candidates in the local elections. The meeting voted against this on the grounds that it would split the anti - cuts movement and narrow its base.
The meeting also heard a short speech from the honorary president Tony Benn and there were also guest speeches from a Belgian trade unionist and a Tunisian activist.
All in all a useful and promising meeting.
Andy Richards
6 comments
Twitter Trackbacks for Coalition of Resistance National Committee - a good start : Socialist Resistance: Fourth International in Britain [socialistresistance.org] on Topsy.com · 17 January 2011
[...] Coalition of Resistance National Committee - a good start : Socialist Resistance: Fourth Internation... socialistresistance.org/1180/coalition-of-resistance-national-committee-a-good-start – view page – cached Around 80 people attended the first meeting the CoR national Committee after November’s founding conference. [...]
Doug · 22 January 2011
'The other thorny issue was whether CoR should encourage local anti-cuts campaigns to stand candidates in the local elections. The meeting voted against this on the grounds that it would split the anti - cuts movement and narrow its base'
In other words, give a free ride to even pro cuts Labour candidates, putting the Labour Party before the anti cuts movement. Disgraceful.
Ned · 23 January 2011
There was another issue that has not been reported, namely should CoR hold Nat. Exec. meetings in cities other than London ? There was reluctance amongst CoR members but this was due to the fact that there is no substantial financial backing by trades unions or any other affiliated bodies. The motion was passed however, which greatly encouraged Anti-Cuts representatives that had themselves travelled from Wigan, Tyne and Wear and Bristol. The crucial issue for CoR is to become recogniseable outside of London. London is viewed by many outside the capital as the creator of this mess. It is important that CoR members are able to relate to people in the rest of the country where in many places the cuts are going to have a devastating effect upon entire communities. Thatcher in Liverpool in the 80s springs to mind. CoR should be urged to grow nationally not capitally, though of course growth throughout the capital should not be discouraged. Will CoR Tour? Lets hope so.
Andy Richards · 23 January 2011
In what sense is this "putting the Labour Party before the anti-cuts movement"? Many people decided to join a campaign against the cuts, not a political party. Many will support other electoral parties or be members of them. Others do not support any kind of electoral approach at all and do not want to see the campaign they joined giving any priority to electoral work. If people involved in anti-cuts campaigns want to stand in left political formations against New Labour and the ConDems - fine. If a local anti-cuts group thinks it can do it without splitting themselves - fine (good luck with that!). But it would be disastrous for CoR to advocate it. Even the SP have pulled back from advocating this in the NSSN.
Roy · 25 January 2011
So when Labour Candidates say 'we won't sign your anti cuts pledge' we do exactly what?
Duncan · 25 January 2011
Roy, what you're mixing up here is who the "we" is. Anti-cuts groups contain members of different political parties, and of none. If the anti-cuts groups run in elections, then the people in other political parties will leave. They won't campaign against their own parties. Certainly candidates should be run against those who support cuts -- but that the job of TUSC, Respect, the SSP and other anti-cuts parties. It's not the role of anti-cuts groups but, on the contrary, it's something that would divide the anti-cuts movement and push left-wing Greens and Labour people into a defensive position.