[MELBOURNE — On May 11, the Socialist Alliance sponsored a trade union seminar, discussing, among other things, unions and political representation. This question of relating to political parties, and specifically the ALP, has been an increasing focus of discussion among Victorian unionists, particularly since Electrical Trades Union Victorian Secretary Dean Mighell announced his resignation from the ALP, and the Victorian branch of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union stopped its affiliation to the ALP for six months.
After a plenary of speakers from the political parties, union representatives addressed the forum. Victorian Trades Hall Council Secretary Leigh Hubbard spoke first, followed by Australian Manufacturing Workers Union national council member Chris Spindler and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union's Gareth Stephenson, who is a member of the construction division's committee of management. In the interests of furthering the discussion, Green Left Weekly re-prints below abridged versions of the three unionists' speeches to the forum.]
I haven't been a member of the ALP for about 15 or 16 years now, but I recall that back in the 1970s, it was unions that were not in the ALP that were seen as being the conservative unions. Even the right-wing unions within the ALP were displaying a political understanding that went beyond purely industrial issues. But now it is left-wing unions that are in the spotlight raising the issue of disaffiliation.
One of the questions I think must be asked is: How much of the present conservatism in the ALP is due to the union movement having lost sight of the wider political objective?
Once, the union movement was propelled into political action in order to improve the working conditions of its members. Such activism may have been restricted within ALP forums, but it was significant.
Even the somewhat-less-militant unions like the old Australian Postal and Telecommunications Union, which I was once a member of, contained in its constitution the old ALP objective of: "the democratic socialisation of industry production, distribution and exchange to the extent necessary to prevent exploitation and other anti-social features".
Without trying to list the myriad of reasons for the ALP's demise as a vehicle for social change, I think we should try to understand the union movement's almost total loss of influence within the ALP.
During the last five years, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union has held two national activist seminars in Canberra. At both of those seminars, a discussion has arisen about the need to develop a political agenda for the CFMEU, and the union movement generally, without necessarily having discussion about the ALP.
One of the points made was that there seems to be a correlation between the union movement's abandonment of the pursuit of political change (and its willingness to identify as socialist) and its embrace of the 1980s Prices and Incomes Accord. During this process, in effect, unions ceded policy making to the parliamentary wing of the ALP.
Far from the Accord being the pinnacle of union influence on the national stage, it threatened to carry us out of the action. As the union movement became silent, so the ALP moved further to the right.
Maybe the discussion about political activism within the trade union movement shouldn't necessarily centre on the ALP — but it can't help but include discussion about it for at least two reasons.
First, most of the unions that see value in wider political activity are ALP affiliates.
The second reason is that, for a very long time, the ALP has been the only left party with mass support. Even if, at its best, the ALP has done no more than respond to union movement demands, it has historically still been responsible for some lasting and beneficial reforms.
It has been, and still is, impossible to ignore the ALP. Although current consideration of the ALP may go no further than analysing its existence — as that other group of capitalist bastards.
Are we maintaining the ALP when we ought to pull the plug on it? Can we continue a broader political life without being in the ALP?
We probably won't find out the answer to the first question unless unions disaffiliate on-masse. But I suspect the outcome of such an action would provide the answer to the second question.
Maybe this would lead to either a credible alternative to the ALP asserting itself, or the rapid reform of the ALP to a state where it might be worthy of the union movement's practical, organisational and moral support.
In the CFMEU we have not had this kind of very detailed discussion. Not because the opportunity doesn't exist — the topic has certainly been raised, particularly in the lead-up to federal and state elections — there just hasn't been the necessary energy so far to really press the issue. Although I shouldn't ignore the fact that the CFMEU has at least discussed funding [non-ALP] militant candidates in selected electorates.
I can then, only speak from my own personal point of view, as a former ALP member and one of many, I think a majority, of union members who are disillusioned in the ALP — although we expect so little of the ALP that even disillusionment is impossible.
In light of the ALP's abysmal performance, its cynical internal organisational activities and its own publicly stated view that it should distance itself from union influence, I think that we, as a trade union movement, should cut the ALP adrift.
In so doing, and I feel secure that it can't make anything much worse, we should set about the work of building another party or coalition of groups, which in my view will either result in a credible alternative or force some improvement in the ALP.
From Green Left Weekly, June 5, 2002.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.