BY SARAH PEART
GLASGOW — In the same week that the Scottish Parliament celebrated its first 1000 days of existence on March 26, its members voted themselves a 13.5% wage increase, placing MSPs in the top 5% of income earners in Scotland. The sole vote against was cast by Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) MSP Tommy Sheridan, who argued instead that MSPs' salaries should be reduced to that of the average skilled worker.
Since Sheridan was first elected in 1999, the SSP has grown to be the fifth biggest party in Scotland, with 60 branches. In the 2003 elections, the SSP are planning to stand in all 73 constituencies. Green Left Weekly spoke to Sheridan about the role of socialists in parliament.
In your book Imagine [written by Sheridan and Alan McCombes] you argue that social change will come from outside parliament. How does being in parliament contribute to this?
For the kind of fundamental change that the SSP promotes — bottom to top change, so that those who create the wealth actually own and control it instead of being continually exploited by others who own it — you have to use all of the potential weapons in your armoury.
That means that you don't just stand on the sidelines and condemn parliament and the parliamentary road. I don't think "voting for socialism" will be possible, but using parliament to popularise socialist ideas will be very, very important. Societal change will be a process rather than a single event. Having socialists in positions of elected authority, using that authority to raise their ideas, will be an influential part of that process.
A lot of people think politicians know what they are talking about, (although the more you learn about politicians the more you realise that they don't). We need to appeal to the broad masses. If we can use parliamentary positions in an honest and integral way, linking them to direct action movements, then I think we can begin building a genuine mass movement.
I remember the first time after I was elected that I got arrested at a protest, someone told me that it was alright getting arrested when I wasn't in parliament, but I shouldn't get arrested now. I think this is nonsense — once elected you should be getting arrested more because you should be prepared to lead campaigns.
The profile of the SSP — and of socialism — has increased tenfold since my election in 1999. We have begun to put socialist ideas back onto the agenda — before they were seen as the ideas of the dinosaurs. Now, public ownership and alternatives to globalisation and the free market are being discussed again.
What pressures are there on socialist parliamentarians?
The basis on which you were elected is important. If we were part of an alliance of different ideas, then once you were elected you could be pressured by the more conformist elements of your alliance. But the SSP is a socialist party. We may have differences tactically but we are all in the same boat. The SSP is not a uniform party but it has a uniform outlook: anti-free market determination.
The SSP's parliamentary wage policy helps us keep our feet on the ground. In 1999, I was the only MSP who called for MPs' wages to be that of the average skilled worker. I got one vote — mine. Now the Scottish parliament is having the same argument and had the same vote. But we've been able to raise how out of touch politicians are with other people's lives. I don't believe an MSP is worth two teachers, two nurses or two firefighters. I donate half my salary to the SSP, taking an average skilled worker's wage for myself.
What are the SSP's prospects in next year's elections?
Losing a seat would be a setback. Our highest expectations would be six to eight MSPs. If we can elect another one to three MSPs it will be a fantastic advance.
The biggest issue for us during the elections will be wealth inequality and the need to redistribute the wealth. We will be campaigning to say that the free market means inequality and poverty. We have to communicate to people that socialism will mean a redistribution of wealth and a more secure and better standard of life for ordinary people. Underpinning all of that is the need to convince people that we are honest, transparent, up front and mean what we say.
Many young people today are totally disillusioned with parliamentary politics — how do you relate to them?
I think we need to differentiate between cynicism towards politicians and cynicism towards politics. I think young people are interested in big ideas — they are interested in a sustainable future, peace and a whole gamut of political issues. There is no magic potion to attract young people — we just need to keep being involved in all the social movements.
The SSP has probably got more young political activists than any other political party in Scotland.
I speak to students now who are holding down two or three jobs — whose time is so precious. I think this is deliberate — I remember former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher making the point that the more educated the working classes are the more they may question the free market. I think [the government is] trying to control the way it educates people — consciously promoting entrepreneurial philosophy so that the free market ideology is safe.
A significant minority of younger people reject that and we need to get them politically active in some way. That is difficult. There is no easy way to encapsulate and encourage the natural energy and flamboyancy of young people, while at the same time having a party that at least has some discipline. It is all about balance.
We have a youth section in our party and our youth section has as much autonomy possible to do things, take initiatives, without having to get it rubber stamped by 'x','y' or 'z' committee. On the other hand, if the youth section was doing something that was damaging to the party as a whole then we would hope that they were responsible enough to realise that and not pursue that course of action. That's not written down anywhere — we just need to provide as much freedom of expression within our party as possible because I don't think young people want to join a tightly knit centrally controlled party.
What are the day-to-day tasks of a revolutionary parliamentarian?
The most important task of a revolutionary MSP is to do the job — trying to represent the people who come to you for help — well. Some people criticise MSPs for being glorified social workers, but we do need to listen to people's problems.
We have a twice weekly "Tommy's surgery". These are for people to come and talk to us about any problem: from not being able to get housing repair done; to their relations being in prison as a result of a miscarriage of justice; to someone who has lost an appeal against the removal of their social security benefit. We need to take up these problems and fight for these people. There is no use arguing for people to support us if we can't then fight for them.
The way I look at it is that it is a bit like being a shop steward for the working class. If you were a workplace steward and you didn't help workers then the next time the election comes around you wouldn't be the shop steward anymore. You can't just spout socialism without doing the job on the ground. Day to day you are responding to people's problems and trying to get the authorities to act and be compassionate and often we secure small victories.
The next element is trying to use the parliamentary process to promote the policies of the party. That isn't always easy because the presiding officer decides what can and cannot be said or debated, moved or amended. It can be difficult but you just have to do the best you can. The other big part of my work is using the media to promote our policies.
Those are the three areas: firstly, to represent people to the best of your ability, and secondly, to use the parliament to promote working class policies that are about change and redistributing wealth. Thirdly, we need to use the media to promote the ideas of socialism.
From Green Left Weekly, June 19, 2002.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.