SP election - initial results

by Ray Thu Jul 08, 2004 18:21

Its a history of the SWP, its precursors, and the surrounding Trot groups, from the 1930's and 40's to the 70's. The writing style is reasonably amusing, and the author is happy to tell you about the absurdities of British Trotskyism (one group's detailed predictions in 1942, for example, of how they'd be in power by the end of the decade). Look away now if you don't want to know how it ends...




the author was in the IS, precursors to the SWP in the 60's, which he describes as a golden age for the SWP, where they were open, and democratic. Too open and democratic for the leadership, who enforced a line change in the 70's, making the organisation much more centralist, into the SWP we all know and love today.

by Roderick Thu Jul 08, 2004 18:14

Give us a brief synopsis of the book there

by Buck Mulligan Thu Jul 08, 2004 17:26

"I got a very disappointing 67 votes . I would be even more disappointed if any of those votes were because of my membership of the S.P."

Michael. You considering applying to rejoin?

by Ray Thu Jul 08, 2004 12:23

Its been taken down because, bloody hell, a whole chapter from a book in Comments? The whole book is online here

by Michael Gallagher Thu Jul 08, 2004 06:45

I got a very disappointing 67 votes . I would be even more disappointed if any of those votes were because of my membership of the S.P.

by C.Coady - Ex-member Mon Jun 21, 2004 03:20

Before the S.P. get carried away with their election results ( I for one feel they didn't do half as well as they should have considering the anger etc., out there against this government) and now that they have some more parliamentarians in the frame who may have a stronger voice and with some brilliant young members who might like to cut the puppet strings, can we expect the 'Socialist' Party to address democracy in the party and how the 'organiser/s' run things?

by good god! Fri Jun 18, 2004 02:05

do these people have any cop on!! Brevity being soul of wit and all that ..... Bet the UKIP did not bore people with such shite

by Fell asleep Thu Jun 17, 2004 22:53

Has he finished yet?

by Interested Thu Jun 17, 2004 17:54

This is the commentary on the elections, in Britain at any rate, from the Socialist Appeal tendency which was expelled by the CWI in early 1992.

START

Historic defeats for Blair in Super Thursday's polarised elections
By Phil Mitchinson


Only a month ago Tony Blair pledged to resign if he became an electoral liability to Labour. The results of the triple elections held on Thursday June 10 confirm him, and more importantly his policies, as just that. In not one, not two, but three elections on the same day Blair was given his marching orders. Labour suffered their worst electoral defeats ever.

As usual, however, Blair's earlier promise was quickly forgotten as all the old, tired and lame excuses about "mid-term blues" were trotted out, to try to explain away Labour's record breaking defeats.

With perhaps only a year to go to a general election, Super Thursday's poll for local councils nationwide, London's Mayor and Assembly, and the European Parliament provide an important indicator of what the future holds for Blair and co.

A lot can still happen in the twelve months or so before parliamentary elections. Blair could yet resign or be forced out, although that looks less likely with each passing day and each glibly ignored defeat. The results of Thursday's polls cannot tell us exactly what will happen in a year's time, but they do tell us quite clearly the results of the last seven years of Blair.

Like all elections, this latest only provides a snapshot of opinion at a given moment. Nevertheless some snapshots can tell you more than others, and this one provides us with a great deal of information about the developing mood in Britain and particularly the growing polarisation of British society.

In the first place these elections are a decisive rejection of Blair and Blairism - that combination of a slavish support for US imperialism overseas and willingness to do the bidding of the city of London at home. For many this was an opportunity to express opposition to the war in Iraq by voting against Blair or by not voting at all. It was more than just a referendum on this question, however. Patience has long since run out with Blair not only in relation to the lies over the disastrous occupation of Iraq, but with his government's failure to solve any of the problems facing the working class in their daily lives.

Local Councils and London

In the local council elections Labour was beaten into third place with just 26 percent of the vote, with the Liberals in second place on 29 percent and the Tories winning with 38 percent.

Labour's vote was the worst of any governing party in history. They lost more than 460 councillors and relinquished control of seven councils, including Newcastle upon Tyne, Trafford, Doncaster and, for the first time in 25 years, Leeds.

Labour has never previously lost Doncaster, and Newcastle was a stronghold for 30 years. Even in Barnsley, Labour only clung on by one seat. In Wales despite their best European election results, in the local elections they lost control of Swansea and Cardiff councils.

The Liberals and the Tories both won councils from Labour control. Only London bucked the trend, re-electing Ken Livingstone as a Labour mayor. The lesson for nervous Labour MPs, fearful of losing their seats, is clear - disagreeing constantly with Blair is the only way to keep their jobs.

In London, Blair had allowed Livingstone back into the party, in a desperate bid to prop up Labour's vote in the assembly election. That strategy failed too, Livingstone's re-election was combined with a hammering for Labour in the assembly ballot, demonstrating that the combination of being both Labour and anti-Blair is an election winner.

There was a 37% turnout among the 5.2 million people eligible to vote in London, up from 33.5% in 2000.

Eighteen hours after polling stations closed Livingstone had to wait for confirmation of a second term, having seen his ratings slump largely as a result of the government's unpopularity and a backlash from the Iraq war.

Livingstone failed to win a simple majority of votes cast across the capital, but retained his job after second-preference votes were redistributed from unsuccessful candidates. He beat Tory Steve Norris's 542,423 first-preference votes and 667,178 votes on the final count by 685,541 and 828,380 votes respectively.

Voters had not turned to the Liberal Democrats in the capital, Livingstone explained, but to "a Labour candidate standing for good public services, protection of the environment and opposition to the war. I believe the same would happen nationally."

Despite Livingstone's victory - which turned out to be quite close - Labour took another bashing in the London Regional poll.

The biggest casualty was Toby Harris, leader of the Labour group in the London assembly and chairman of the Metropolitan Police Authority. His 4,380 majority in Brent and Harrow was overturned as his vote was squeezed by the other parties to give the Tories a 4,686 majority.

The UK Independence Party - which we shall return to later - made big gains in London, where their policy is to abolish the assembly, as they did in council elections around the country.

Ukip polled 26,703 votes in Bexley and Bromley, a seat held by the Tories with 64,000 votes. In Croydon and Sutton, held by Conservative Andrew Pelling with 52,330 votes, Ukip took 15,203 votes. The Liberal Democrats polled 28,636 and Labour took third place with 25,861.

Ukip also polled strongly in Enfield and Haringey with 10,652 votes in a seat held by Labour. Ukip scuppered Tory hopes of taking the seat by securing 8.58% of the vote. This was a taste of what UKIP was going to do to the Tory vote in the European elections when the results came out a few days later.

UKIP also performed well in east London, taking 12 % in the City and East seat, which was held by Labour with a majority reduced by 16%.

European elections

If the council elections were the worst electoral result for Labour since the second world war, then the euro election results are the worst ever by a sitting government in a national vote since the first world war. They are Labour's worst results since the party began standing in nationwide elections.

So bad are these results, that even some of the Blairite leaders have been forced to concede that this is not just mid term blues - but also that they have been badly damaged by the war in Iraq. Any hopes they may harbour of that position changing in the next twelve months are but pipedreams. The so-called handover of power on June 30 will see little alter dramatically on the ground. The impact of the war in Iraq, and the lies surrounding it will continue up to the next general election and beyond.

In any case this was about more than the disastrous imperialist occupation of Iraq. This was a protest too over schools, health, tuition fees, and the state of life in Britain today.

In the local elections Labour were beaten into third place behind both the Tories and the Liberal Democrats. Labour's share of the vote was the worst on record at 26 percent. In 1983, when Blair's predecessors the SDP split away from Labour, the party narrowly avoided such a humiliation. At that time the right of the party began their ascendancy, claiming the need for a new direction. How much more so is that the case today? In 1983 with a manifesto described by the right-wing as the longest suicide note in history, Labour did better than they did in these elections under Blair.

These results can only be interpreted as a rejection of the entire Blair project. In fact, they are record breaking on several levels. The 2004 European election is the first in which the two major parties struggled to win a majority of the votes cast; the first in which parties not represented in the House of Commons took more than 25 percent of the total; and the first election in British history in which the "winning" party got less than a third of the votes. No election since the unique post-war "khaki election" of 1918 has seen the share of the vote enjoyed by the top parties fall so low.

In the European elections Labour came second with a paltry 22 percent, taking 19 seats. The Tories meanwhile secured a humiliating victory securing just under 27 percent of the vote and 27 seats. The Tories may have won, but they did so with their worst vote since 1832.

Labour's result, meanwhile, is the worst result of a governing party in British electoral history.

Across the continent there was a bruising for the parties in power. The press are keen to assure us that this is typical ‘anti-incumbency'. However, if the ‘incumbents' were acting in the interests of the majority, and carrying out measures that benefited ordinary working people, the majority would not vote against them simply because they are the incumbents. The vote against each of them was in reality a reflection of the opposition of huge numbers across Europe to the capitalist policies being carried out by governments against the interests of the working class.

The turnout was low everywhere, also reflecting the disappointment of millions with their conditions and the failure of their governments to provide any solutions.

The turnout in the UK was 39% - up on the last time these elections were fought in 1999, but this was largely credited to the all-postal ballots controversially forced through by the government in four regions.

The turnout in the local elections, for example, was estimated to be up by an average of 9% on last year's polls to 40% overall. In the four regions taking part in trials of all-postal ballots turnout was up by 13%, the BBC reported.

However, the UK's turnout was still lower than the EU average of 44.6%, itself a record low, with a turnout of just 28.7% among the 10 new members.

Britain's drama over the extraordinary rise of the UK Independence party was mirrored in gains for anti-EU parties in Poland and other new eastern member states.

In Germany there was a humiliating defeat for Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's Social Democrats, the Christian Democrats topped the poll with 44.5%

France saw a heavy blow to the centre-right government of Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the prime minister, amid record abstention levels. This was the price they paid for their attacks on pensions and welfare. They will face opposition to their attacks not only at the polls but on the streets and in the shape of militant industrial action in the next period.

Spain was one of the few countries where the government escaped a kicking - as yet their policies at home have not been tested, but they did withdraw troops from Iraq, the policy which swept them to office on the back of a mass movement against Aznar's support for Bush and the invasion of Iraq. In Portugal the conservative government was defeated by the opposition socialists.

So-called maverick candidates did well: in the Netherlands Paul Van Buitenen's new Transparent Europe, the Brussels whistleblower who helped bring down the European commission in 1999, won two seats. In Austria there was success for Hans Peter Martin, the Socialist who has highlighted the controversial abuse of travel allowances by fellow MEPs. On the far right meanwhile, Austria's Freedom Party lost four of its five seats.

Interestingly turnout was particularly low in the former eastern bloc states. Turnout in Poland was under 30 percent, and in Slovakia was 20 percent. In the Czech Republic, the Eurosceptic Civic Democrats won 30%, compared with 10% for the prime minister Vladimir Spidla's Social Democrats.

The lack of participation in Eastern Europe's new member states, was a protest against the policies of their own governments and a confirmation that voting to join the EU was a vote for grants and promised prosperity, not any ideological belief in the greater glory of a capitalist European Union.

In Britain the turnout was up, a little. This is in no small part due to the introduction of all postal voting in some areas which has led to something of a new potential scandal, with claims of underhand tactics being used to collect in postal voting forms reported in some newspapers. Some who stayed away in protest at the last election, may have decided to vote for one of the many alternatives on offer on this occasion to register their disapproval. Most however, remained at home.

When the results of the European elections were announced on Sunday Labour had done even worse than the disaster of the local elections. Although coming second, they secured just 22 percent of the vote.

Yet this was not the triumph the Tories had hoped for paving the way for a return to office in the next general election. They won the local elections, and the European elections, but saw their vote splinter to the right with the rise of the UK Independence Party.

Polarisation and splinters

Across each of the three elections in Britain we see the same process, a polarisation of society reflected in a splintering of the vote to right and left. The Tories hoping for the 40 percent that would have put them on course to win a general election, following their 38 percent in the local elections, lost 45 percent of their votes to the UKIP in the European poll.

Meanwhile, as many as 50 percent of those who voted Labour in 2001 did not vote for them this time. However, they could not find an alternative either. With all due respect to RESPECT, the ‘new party' of George Galloway, apart from the expelled Labour MP himself they failed to make the breakthrough they had hoped for. If ever there was an opportune moment to stand against Labour from the left, in opposition to the war etc. this was surely it. They failed. The only conclusion one can draw is that there is no room outside Labour to the left. These forces were they united against Blair and co. fighting for socialist policies inside the movement could make a decisive difference. Outside they are whistling in the wind. They can provide a home for disenchanted activists who can take no more, and those on the left who have never been in Labour. The Guardian newspaper published a series of interviews on the eve of the election to find out who people felt they could vote for if they could no longer bring themselves to vote Labour. They got some interesting results. Some, of course, declared that they would vote for Respect, but the case of Anne Swingler is interesting:

"Anne Swingler, widow of Stephen Swingler MP, Harold Wilson's transport minister

I joined the Labour League of Youth when I was 19 in 1935 and I am now 89. I have voted Labour all my life but last month I left the party. It was a very painful decision.

I do feel that the Labour party has done a lot of very good things for which I would want to support it but there is this big problem about Iraq. The war was quite monstrous.

If I don't vote Labour, I probably won't vote at all which will be very difficult for me. It will be very emotional. I have joined Respect because I feel at ease with them, but I don't think I will be voting for them." The Guardian 09/06/04

No-one can doubt the honest intention of those who have joined Respect or those who voted for them, the problem is that this road leads only into the wilderness, as all history demonstrates. Now - with the unions beginning a campaign to reclaim Labour for the working class - is not the time for frustration.

Respect managed just 1.5 percent of the vote overall - although Galloway himself managed to take 90,000 votes in London. In the rest of the country they managed a total of 160,000 votes (excluding Galloway).

Some Labour voters will have turned to the Liberals, the Greens (whose vote increased a little in many areas), or even UKIP (for whom some will have voted simply in protest at all the major parties, rather than for their policies). In reality, most were voting against Blair, but not for anything. The majority of the protest vote against Blair stayed at home and voted for no-one. Meanwhile the Tory protest vote went to UKIP.

In Yorkshire and Humberside the Tory share of the vote fell by 12 points to 25 percent; and Labour were down five points to 26 percent. Ukip were the main beneficiaries up from 7 percent to 14 percent but the Lib Dems were also up and maintained their position in third place.

In the Labour bastion of the North East their vote dropped by eight points to 34 percent but the Tories were down by nine points to only 19 percent share of the vote. In the region where they gained Newcastle-upon-Tyne council the Lib Dems nearly pushed the Tories into third place with a four point mini-surge to an 18 percent share of the vote. Again Ukip took 12 percent of the vote.

In the first results to be declared, in London, Labour were the biggest losers down 10 points compared with the Tories' six-point drop. The gainers were Ukip up five points to 12% share of the vote, the Lib Dems up four points to 15% and the Respect coalition that took 5% of the vote. The Greens maintained 8%.

Overall Ukip scored the biggest successes, with the media now talking about the rise of a new force in British politics. This is an exaggeration. In reality, in addition to some protest votes against politicians in general, gained by their demagogic appeals against corruption and waste, this is largely a right wing Tory splinter. They secured 16 percent of the vote taking 12 seats, with 2.6 million votes, but many of these will be returning to the Tories at the next general election.

These results demonstrate clearly that Labour could indeed lose that election as we have explained for some time. They may yet do so. However, the Tories suffered something of a humiliation too, despite winning. They won with just 26.7 percent of the vote. In the shape of some of UKIP's support, we got a glimpse too of the reactionaries lurking behind the Tories coat-tails

No doubt many Tories unwilling to turnout in recent years to back the likes of failed leaders Hague and Duncan Smith, feel their party has recovered somewhat under Michael Howard's leadership. Their vote will no doubt pick up at the next election, following their disaster in 2001. On this occasion, however, a large number of them turned up, but did not vote for Michael Howard and co. Instead they voted in protest over European integration, and in protest at their own leaders not being right wing enough, not being Thatcherite enough, by voting to the right of the Tories for the UK Independence Party.

UK Independence Party

Though it undoubtedly owes its success to its simplistic anti-European message in a European parliamentary election, Ukip's significance is wider. Europe may be Ukip's preoccupation, but the party is recognisably also a characteristic populist party of the right, anti-immigrant, and anti-politician. Ironically parties of this kind are more familiar on the continent. They share many similarities with those small right wing parties who have gained significant votes in Europe in recent years. This is the first time such a party has made such an impact in a UK election. Rather than the new force in British politics that the papers describe them as, they show us the future of the Tory party as it moves further right, and, in the future more serious splits to the right of the Tories.

UKIP won 12 seats in the European parliament, but even with their share of the vote repeated they will not win any seats in the next general election. They may however split the Tory vote in some areas.

UKIP may also have taken some votes from the fascist BNP. The BNP had high hopes of winning a seat in the European elections in the North West of England. They did not. Nationally they won 4.9 percent of the poll, with over 800,000 votes. They actually lost a couple of their council seats in the local elections in the north of England, but gained a couple in the south. Whilst the threat these pernicious creatures pose should not be exaggerrated, they clearly cannot be ignored. The policy pursued by the leaders of the main parties, shamefully including Labour - vote for anyone to stop the BNP - will not defeat them. Where they represent a physical threat to individuals the labour movement must be mobilised to drive them out. In the long run this kind of filth can only be defeated by a labour movement struggling for a socialist society. The failure of a Labour government wedded to the market is what breeds the conditions in which these viruses can grow.

Is this then the new watershed in British politics declared by former right wing Labour MP and disgraced TV presenter Robert Kilroy-Silk (who resigned from his job after writing a racist anti-Arab article in a national daily paper)? Kilroy-Silk has now shown his true colours. He is, and always was, a Tory. It is unlikely, however, that his party's success in these elections will be repeated in the general election to come. More likely the impact of their vote will be to push the Tories still further to the right and not just on Europe. Howard and co. will now attack asylum seekers, and adopt a more harshly right wing line to woo back those who defected to the little Englanders of UKIP.

"Clearly the Conservative party is highly Eurosceptic, and is probably coming increasingly more towards the Ukip line on this particular issue, as we expect them to in the next two weeks or more," Kilroy-Silk told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

The Liberals meanwhile still dream about winning office. They continue to talk about a three horse race at the next elections despite being pushed into fourth position with 15 percent of the vote in the European elections. However, the next British election will be a two horse race between Labour and the Tories. If it is a three horse race, the third contender will be neither the Liberals nor the UKIP, but the stay at home and refuse to vote party.

The pro-European Liberals saw their vote increase despite being leapfrogged by UKIP. However, their support has less to do with their enthusiasm for the pipedream of a capitalist united Europe and more to do with their mildly anti-war stance.

The party followed up its capture of Newcastle council last week by winning a European seat from Labour in Tony Blair's backyard of north-east England as the Lib Dem vote rose by 4% to 18%. In London the Lib Dem vote was up 4% to 15%, with it pushing Ukip into fourth place. In Wales it finished fifth, 561 votes behind Ukip, also trailing Labour, Plaid Cymru and the Conservatives. A 2% jump in the share of the vote in Wales to nearly 10.5% was topped by a 7.39% increase for Ukip to just over 10.5%.

The Liberals vote and perhaps their number of seats in Britain's parliament might increase at the next general election. The share of the vote for the smaller fringe parties may increase a little too. In the main, however, that election will be a battle between the Tories and Labour.

The nationalists in Scotland and particularly in Wales have not been able to gain from Blair's woes. In Scotland the SNP's vote fell, while the Scottish Socialist Party of Tommy Sheridan made only small gains, falling a long way short of winning a seat.

In Wales, whilst Labour historically lost control of councils in Cardiff and Swansea, in the valleys Labour managed to win back councils lost a few years ago to the Nationalist Plaid Cymru. Experience of these Tories wrapped in their national flags - despite their occasional left-wing rhetoric - in office locally has exposed them.

In the European elections Labour's vote actually increased in Wales while Plaid Cymru's vote plummeted. In both Scotland and Wales none of the other fringe parties scored any noticeable success. UKIP, which is largely seen as an English Party, if not a little Englander party, saw their vote increase, but not enough to win a seat.

What conclusion will the Labour leaders now draw from these earth shattering historic defeats? All evidence of Blair and his clique of advisers in the past suggests they will ignore the abstentions and the sizeable votes to their left, and attempt once more to out Tory the Tories, drawing the erroneous conclusion that the electorate is right wing, pushing still more Labour voters to withhold their vote.

The votes of those who voted Labour, those who voted to Labour's left, and those who refused to vote for Blair, because Labour is not left enough, would be enough to win a landslide victory.

However, for the Blairites it is not they or their policies which are wrong but the electorate: "These people who think they get a free hit will find themselves with a rude shock and a Tory MP," said Peter Hain, the Labour leader of the House of Commons. "They could deprive us of our majority." In other words, it's not Labour that has to change, but the electorate. This staggering arrogance brings to mind Bertolt Brecht's advice to the East German Stalinist leaders, in response to their reported disappointment in the people, Brecht ironically advised them to dissolve the people and elect a new one. Blair would like nothing better.

Mandelson and the other gurus of Blairism will now argue for a shift still further right, and to once again ape whatever policies the Tories put forward. Down this road lies defeat. The only reason Labour remain favourites to win the next election is the mess in which the Tories still find themselves.

UKIP might be able to do enough to split a few Tory votes and help keep Labour in office. That will not save Blair, however. If not before the next election then soon after - whether Labour win or lose - Blair will go.

The Tories can win the next election. The only way to guarantee they do not is for Labour to dump Blair and Blairism. Clare Short, the Labour MP who resigned from the cabinet following the war in Iraq, called on Blair to resign following the election disaster. "I think that the electorate is sending a message to Tony Blair because the Labour party is incapable of correcting him. What he did in Iraq has brought disgrace and dishonour on Britain around the world," she said.

She added: "As Tony Blair won't change the policy, the only way to make a correction is for him to step aside from the leadership."

Former right wing deputy Labour leader Roy Hattersley argued following the election results: "The prime minister will not extract himself from the debris of that policy by following the Mandelson prescription and proving that he is still in charge by dragging the party further and further to the right.

"Redemption for the government lies in respecting the hopes and fears of its traditional supporters. Drawing a line under Iraq would help. But the disastrous decision to follow George Bush to war - and to justify the folly with fake evidence about WMD - is now regarded as no more than an example of Blair's shortcomings. He has to prove that he stands for something - something with which families earning less than £50,000 a year can identify."

Despite Blair and co continuing their Tory privatising agenda, they may yet limp back into office. However, on the economic, industrial and political front the whole situation in Britain is changing. A third Labour government, if that is what emerges from the next election, will be faced with conflicts with the unions, a struggling economy, and backbench MPs more willing than ever to rebel. Even before that election however, there can be big battles with the unions industrially, and inside the party. Super Thursday's results put the penultimate nail in the coffin of Blairism. The final nail is in the hands of the trade unions and the ranks of the party who must now move to drive it home.

These elections did mark a turning point in British politics. Not because of the rise of the much trumpeted new political force, but because of the polarisation of society they reflect. The period of consensus in Britain is decisively over. The next period promises to be a stormy one in Britain. In those storms the working class will move again and again to reconquer and transform its own organisations. In those struggles the ideas of Marxism provide the key to understanding the relationship between the working class, the unions, Labour and the struggle for socialist change.

The Guardian's interviews with voters at the 2004 elections (quoted earlier) provided some interesting results, none more so than the reply of May King Tsang, a trainee manager in a telecommunications billing company:

"I've been voting Labour ever since I was old enough to vote. I withdrew my Labour membership earlier this year as a protest but recently I have reinstated it.

I disagree with the way Blair has handled the whole Iraq affair but I have had to rejoin Labour because I just couldn't find an alternative. And if you look at all the other alternatives there isn't a party that's big enough to make the changes.

I think the only viable solution for Labour voters is to stick with the Labour party and change it from within. Go to the grassroots and root out the problem, which is Blair and New Labour, and try to reclaim the party." (my emphasis - PM)

The myth that Blair wins elections has been utterly destroyed. He must go and take the whole Tory, market dominated philosophy with him. The convening of a conference by the trade unions to fight to reclaim Labour for the working class and for socialist policies could not come at a better time.

A new period has opened in Britain. It began with the mass movement against the war, and the first big strikes for a decade and more. In these elections we see the confusion which marks the opening of a new stormy period. The growth in support for the right wing of various shades cannot be ignored, it must be combated by the labour movement. That requires a socialist programme. But this development on the right will not be the dominant feature of the next period. It will be the rise in militancy of the trade unions, the struggles of the working class industrially and politically, inside Labour, which will characterise the next few years. In conducting those struggles, the perspectives of Marxism, the analysis, and programme of Marxist.com will be a vital weapon.

The final defeat of Blair and Blairism is not the end for us. It is only the beginning. The beginning of the struggle to reconquer the labour movement for socialism, and the struggle for the socialist transformation of society.

June 16, 2004

by Clive Barker - Independent Socialist Wed Jun 16, 2004 15:30

Really Brian, just answer the questions and quit the shimmy-shammying. You’ve happily replied to someone called “Tallyman” and someone else called “SPurious “. You intially posted a response to “Voter”, but as soon as the going got hot, you resorted to this: “If you want your criticisms to be taken seriously, you will have to post them in a serious manner. That includes using your actual name. I have no desire to discuss anything with people who use the safe cloak of anonymity to make their snide little attacks.”).

Such dishonesty!

And yes, my name is Clive Barker. Do you need my address before you deign to respond to me?

by TrotSPot Wed Jun 16, 2004 14:57

But you already had 3 seats in the ward in Coventry, you now have 2, having lost 1 to Labour. It really seems rather odd that when Labour was losing seats elsewhere in a meltdown, in Coventry they managed to gain a seat from the SP(SA). Hardly a sign of the working class making a turn to the CWI.

by f Tue Jun 15, 2004 16:08

On Coventry, I think our friend is being a little disingenous. In that election the SP took 2 of the 3 seats in that ward and were beaten by the Labour candidate for the third seat by just 18 votes. Hardly the sign of a meltdown of the SP organisation in Coventry, in fact it was a very good showing considering the difficulty of winning all 3 seats in one ward at one go.

by Mark H Tue Jun 15, 2004 15:23

And mine is H.
"Beria" is that your real name?

by voter Tue Jun 15, 2004 14:38

It's disappointing to hear some SP members going around claiming that the Collins vote represents an "SP vote". The Collins vote is a reflection of the hard work Joan put into the anti bin tax campaign in the Crumlin area over a number of years. Joan was largely left to her own devices as regards the anti bin tax campaign there, where she was frequently the only SP member at bin tax meetings of 500-600 people. As regards the SP "choosing" not to stand in Crumlin - the SP put all its concentration on the Diarmuid Naessens campaign in the Liberties.

However, at the end of the day, I'm sure that most SPers are pleased that a socialist and anti bin tax campaigner was elected in Crumlin.

by Spuppie Tue Jun 15, 2004 14:30

The vote that Gallagher got was largely an SP vote. This support was built up while he was a member of the SP. We thank all 60 odd individually.

by SY Member (pc) Tue Jun 15, 2004 14:22

The vote that Collins got was largely an SP vote. This support was built up while she was a member of the SP. It should be remembered that the SP called for a vote for Joan Collins. The SP chose not to stand in the ward as we did not wish to split the anti bin tax vote.

by Beria Tue Jun 15, 2004 13:57

In the Dublin City Council area the SWP are far stronger than the SP. This is a fact and no amount of SP lies will change this.

by SP member (personal capacity) Tue Jun 15, 2004 13:28

Yeah right. Let's not forget this elections Wingfield awards go to:
Damon Wise, Karen Wise and Roy Hassey who didn't even get a hundred between the three of them.

by Voter Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:11

Brian, I rather object to this expression 'snide little attacks'. You can agree or disagree with me, and others, but snide? For my own part, I made a very reasoned point, calmly, about the nature of sectarianism, internal dissent and building alliances. There was no mindless abuse.

It seems to me that you disparage practically all criticism, rather than take it seriously and debate the issues head on. Is this indicative at all of what anyone inside your organsiation expressing dissident opinions (eg Connolly/ Collins) might also face? If so, no wonder there is now a long roll call of former leaders who think your organisation has gone seriously off the rails, and no wonder there is widespread concern. This is not a snide comment - it is a reasoned opinion, I would have thought.

As for anonymity, there are many reasons for it. Many of your own leaders have used pen names in the past - eg Peter Hadden and others in the North. Do you now condemn all such practices?

Anyway, on to other things....

by Beria Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:07

Is your surname "C"? Get a life Brian. Maybe if you run in Coventry next time the SA/SP will win back the seat they lost to Labour.

You would be better off addressing the state of the SP in Dublin City. In this area the SP are virtually without a presence. The SWP have shown that they are far stronger. In Dun Laoire the SWP are on a par with you, votewise and are not far behind in South. It is only in Fingal you are ahead.

by Brian C Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:00

If you want your criticisms to be taken seriously, you will have to post them in a serious manner. That includes using your actual name. I have no desire to discuss anything with people who use the safe cloak of anonymity to make their snide little attacks.

by Voter Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:51

Actually, Brian, this is my first contribution to this thread, or any thread that has raised the issue of your electoral successes. But of course you are entitled to ignore both the points I raised, or feedback from anyone else for that matter.... It does seem to me however that you and your colleagues are a mite touchy when criticisms are raised. Yet you want to change society. Challenges to your programme and methods of organisation therefore rather go with the territory.

by Brian C Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:47

I don't see too much of that. Just people who are glad that their organisation made some small but important gains.

As for the rest, I'm sorry but I've already replied to too much anonymous trolling on this thread. So our many-psuedonymed friend will just have to continue replying to himself.

by Voter Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:33

Back in the 1930s, I seem to recall that the Independent Labour Party in Britain had about 100,000 members. Yet Trotsky described it as a sect. He was driven to this conclusion, not by the ILP's absolute size, but by the contrast between the membership of the Labour Party, the mass movement outside, the tasks immninently posed by history - and then by the size of the ILP (which was small in comparison to all these factors). I wonder what he would say about the SP today.

Yes, it has made gains - but in comparison to the opportunities that existed, its own lengthy history and the need to build a mass left alternative these gains pale into insignificance. From what I have seen, I do not believe that the organisation is at present capable of breaking from its sectarian traditions and thus addressing these substantial challenges. The saga of Joan Collins and Dermot Connolly has been exhaustively debated elsewhere, as has the fate of many other SP dissidents (including John Throne). If it quells internal dissent in this manner, it is hard to see it reaching out in a genuine manner to other left activists and organisations who are shall we say somewhat less than enthusiastic about the SP organisation. On that basis, the gains that the SP have just made could be whittled away in no time. But even if they are maintained, it is not enough to do anything other than build a sect - an ambition that falls way short of changing society.

It would be good to honestly debate all these issues, rather than witness some mindless crowing.

by Green Genii Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:19

The SP did not do great in Howth, quit the spinning. David Healy of the Greens took the seat.

by TrotSPot Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:03

Dont let success go to your heads lads. Dont forget your losses. In the English & Welsh Locals Labour was decimated losing seats everywhere. Yet they managed to take a seat from the SP (SA)!

"For example in Tallaght Central were SF were targetting 2 seats - Mick Murphy topped the poll."

And? The SF total vote was 800 more than the SP vote in Tallaght Central.

As has been pointed out above, the SP vote across Dublin was less than that of the other Anti Bin Tax candidates. Its really funny to see Brian C hailing Joan Collins yet managing to forget that she had been deselected as a SP candidate.

by Forgive My Cynicism Tue Jun 15, 2004 05:07

For "I'm sorry I inititally put this in the wrong thread" read "I'm sorry I initially started my own thread but my piece generated no response so I've decided to stick it into another thread. Answer me damn it! Somebody answer me!"

Seriously John, if you think one of your articles has something to contribute to another thread it's a bit more mannerly to stick in a link. Don't just repost the same thing in full. Most Indymedia writers think their piece deserves attention. If we all went around attaching them to multiple threads this website would become unusable.

by john throne - labors militant voice Tue Jun 15, 2004 03:49 loughfinn at aol dot com

I am sorry I initially put this in the wrong thread.

I would like to congratulate the left candidates and the anti bin tax candidates for doing relatively well in the elections. All of us who are trying to build a healthy militant workers movement will be glad to see this result. However this is not the end of the question. I would like to remind all of us of the debate that took place before the elections. That is should there be one list of anti bin tax candidates fighting this election or should the various parties run their own seperate candidates and campaigns.

I believe that the election results show that it was a mistake for the different left parties to run their own campaigns. The statistics given by Peter above clearly show that if the various left parties and individuals and groups who had been involved in the bin tax struggle had come together and run a joint campaign with one anti bin tax candidate in each area then it is clear that a number of results would have been achieved.

One there would have been more anti bin tax candidates elected. This would have resulted from the issue being given more emphasis and also more confidence being generated in the struggle. I can think of at least two or three candidates who would have probably got the small number of extra votes necessary to get elected. The result would have been a stronger campaign and a stronger caucus in the city council to fight on this issue.

Another result would have been a set back for sectarianism and a step forward for the struggle to develop united working class struggle either in the form of independent working class united fronts or the building of a workers party. This clear stand would have helped bring new layers of activists into struggle and many older activists back into struggle again to build a new united workers movement.

At this time when the SP in particular will be celebrating its electoral success I would ask the serious members of that organization to consider that while they have achieved electoral gains was their position in the interest of the working class movement and in the longer term in the interest of their own organization.

Those of us who are marxists have always explained that while electoral successes can be important in the greater scheme of things they are quite secondary. The decisive issues are the building of an independent working class movement, the development of class consciousness, the understanding that the working class as a whole has to come together and overthrow capitalism. Much more progress would have been made on these fronts if there had been one united list of anti bin charge candidates which would have helped bring together a more unified and militant working class movement and which would have dealt a blow to sectarianism.

John Throne.
http://laborsmilitantvoice.com

by f Mon Jun 14, 2004 17:51

As a matter of fact I know that at least two left independents (possibly more) in their manifestos advocated a vote for Joe Higgins. The SWP also called for a vote for Joe Higgins in their campaigns.

by f Mon Jun 14, 2004 17:44

Below is a report published originally on the CWI website:

"Anger and resistance into the council" – this slogan of the German affiliate of the CWI in the local election campaign in the East German town of Rostock will become a reality in the first council meeting after the elections on June 13th as Socialist Alternative (CWI Germany) won it’s first councillor.

Sascha Stanicic, Rostock, June 13th 2004
Christine Lehnert will be the first directly elected trotskyist councillor in Germany for decades. With 2.5 percent SAV only narrowly missed a second council seat and received around 4,000 votes (as every voter had three votes this means probably around 2,000 voters).

After an intense election campaign SAV memebers and supporters could celebrate. This was not the case for the social democratic party and for the PDS (Party of Democratic Socialism – former East German ruling stalinist party) which lost many votes. While the votes were counted in the council hall SAV’s success was a number on issue amongst the representatives of the other parties.

All of the established politicians seemed to agree that they will not cooperate with the socialists – no surprise as SAV was the only force which opposed the increase of council funding for the political parties of 130,000 Euros just a week ago. SAV will now prepare for a campaign against this rip-off of the working people in Rostock and also against the planned privatisation of one of the two public hospitals in the city. This was SAV’s first electoral "strike" this year – local election campaigns in Cologne and Aachen will follow in september – and we hope to gain council seats number two and three!

by Peter Mon Jun 14, 2004 17:34

"The Dublin Euro vote for Socialist Party candidate Joe Higgins T.D. at 23,218 (5.5%), was more than a doubling of the 1999 vote and a very credible result for a small party considering the very slender financial resources we had by contrast with other forces. There were also very credible results in other local electoral areas for the Socialist Party candidates who did not win seats on this occasion."

This vote could have been even higher if the SP had approached other candidates and/or other organisations to support Joe. There were many candidates who polled well who agreed with Joe's stance on the bin tax but the SP didn't try to involve them. In fact one of the independent candidates who asked would the SP have a problem with them advocating a No. 1 for Joe was told that there might be legal problems with this. No points for guessing which independent candidate.
Across all the four counties of Dublin the SP got 11,951 votes. The number of votes for non-SP candidates alligned to the anti-bin tax campaign (SWP, WCA, ISN and indepedents) was 14,398. This could have given Joe a total of 26, 349 and the rest.
This doesn't include the Workers Party vote nor for that matter the floating Sinn Fein vote, there were many people who voted SF because they felt that they were involved in the campaign against the bin charges. SP grandstanding was lost on most of the electorate. My fear is that the SP will look at these election results and think that they are doing the right things and will not change their modus operandi. The splendid isolationism is set to continue. Or even worse, put forward the tired notion that the objective conditions aren't right due to the large working class vote, the Sinners got. The figures for Dublin should make them think again. If not now, then when?

by Cathal Brennan - SP Mon Jun 14, 2004 17:27

Brian Greene did exceptionally well in the Howth ward of Fingal Council. Getting a higher first preference vote than the PDs, Sinn Fein, Labour and two of the three Fianna Fail candidates.

Congratualtions to all SP candidates. :)

by Disappointed Mon Jun 14, 2004 16:42

The first count result is in for the Northern Ireland constituency. McCann got 9,000 or so votes, which I think is about 1.6%.

by Joe Higgins T.D. Mon Jun 14, 2004 16:05

Press Statement - 14th June 2004

Local And Euro Elections:
Important Gains for Socialist Party Overlooked
Joe Higgins T.D.
Socialist Party

The disastrous slump in the Fianna Fáil vote and the gains for Sinn Féin in the Local and Euro Elections has led to very important gains for the Socialist Party being overlooked.

Socialist Party candidates topped the poll in Cork North Central, Tallaght Central and Swords, while the combined votes of two Socialist Party candidates in Mulhuddart, was greater than any other Party. All four candidates, Mick Barry, Mick Murphy, Clare Daly and Ruth Coppinger were the first elected in their areas.

The Dublin Euro vote for Socialist Party candidate Joe Higgins T.D. at 23,218 (5.5%), was more than a doubling of the 1999 vote and a very credible result for a small party considering the very slender financial resources we had by contrast with other forces. There were also very credible results in other local electoral areas for the Socialist Party candidates who did not win seats on this occasion.
The Socialist Party will now consolidate its base in all areas where it is active and extend into others and will be serious challengers for a number of Dáil seats in the next General Election.

Privatisation and Bin Tax- Key Issues in Dublin Now.

The results in the Local Election in Dublin means that the bin tax will re-emerge as a key issue. It is quite clear that the massive fight against the stealth tax last autumn was an important factor in the overall election results.

The attempted privatisation of Dublin bus routes and the break up of Aer Rianta can now be resisted with greater confidence by the thousands of workers involved. Facing a ragged Government, workers can now mobilise to defeat the reactionary thrust by Fianna Fáil/ Progressive Democrats towards privatisation of public services.

by Mark Hoskins - Socialist Party - Drogheda Mon Jun 14, 2004 15:51

In Drogheda (St Laurence's Gate Ward), where the Socialist Party ran for the very first time, Frank Gallagher recieved 437 first preferance votes putting him third in a three seat ward after the first count where he remained until after count four, where the second Fianna Fail Candidate was eliminating and the bulk of his transfers went to FF Cllr. Tommy Murphy who had been sitting in fourth place. Frank remained in the contest right up untill the seventh and final count.
This was a tremendous result given the limited resources available to the campaign. Unlike our opponants who had the funds to put out slick glossy leaflets we had to run on a shoestring, raising funds through raffles and a table quiz.
The response on the doorsteps was tremendous. The massive resentment felt towards the sitting Borough council materialised into a strong desire for to put a real working class campaigner on the council.
The vote for the Socialist Party in Drogheda is even more remarkable given that Sinn Fein ran a very strong candidate in the ward who polled 588 first preference votes (and was subsequently elected).
The Drogheda branch of the Socialist Party now hopes to build upon the strong support received during the campaign and increase our presence in the area.

by Brian C. Mon Jun 14, 2004 15:22

I'm not sure where you get the idea that saying "a good day for us in other words, if obviously on a smaller scale than Sinn Fein's victories" means we are trying to equate our own advance with the vastly greater one achieved by Sinn Fein.

As a side issue, the Socialist Party is an all-Ireland party, although we are smaller in the North than in the South. Our Northern members are mostly concentrated in the trade union movement there. Neither do we regard partition as a "non-issue", but this thread is about todays elections and is therefore not the time or place to discuss an issue that comes up over and over on this site.

I realise of course that this is likely to trigger a flurry of abusive anonymous postings, but what can you do...

by SPurious Mon Jun 14, 2004 14:09

The SP attempts to compare their admirable gains to the massive leap forward by Sinn Fein betrays the fact that these people have lost the plot. You will never represent the working classes with anything near the mandate of Sinn Fein. Added to this, SF is an all-Ireland party, while Joe Higgins has often professed that he believes Partition to be a non-issue. Conformist not communist

by KaM - LSP Mon Jun 14, 2004 11:41

We got about 20.000 votes in Belgium. 14.000 in the Flemish part and 6.000 in the French speaking part. That is not bad since we have the lowest budget of all political parties who participated in this elections and received no media coverage.

The national public and commercial TV did not mention us once during the campaign although only 7 parties participated in the European elections. The main 'progressive' newspaper in Flanders De Morgen did mention us once but they could not spell our name correct. (They don't like us but that is another story ;)

The Flemish Greens (not to be compared with the Greens in Ireland) took a lot of 'our' votes because people voted strategic and many people wanted to give them one more change. (They have been in government but f*cked up things badly and showed they were no alternative)

by f - sp (pc) Mon Jun 14, 2004 06:10

Summary of all Socialist Party local election results
COUNCIL ELECTIONS {All figures are 1st preference votes.}

-Dublin City Council-
Diarmuid Naessens (South West Inner City) - 574 (6.59%)

-Fingal County Council-
Tadhg Kenehan - 458 (3.2%)
Clare Daly (Swords) - 2,763 (16.51%) * ELECTED, top of poll
Michael O'Brien (Swords) - 433 (2.59%)
Ruth Coppinger (Mulhuddart) - 1,848 (14.72%) * ELECTED
Helen Redwood (Mulhuddart) - 607 (4.84%)
Susan Fitzgerald (Castleknock) - 661 (5.16%)
Brian Greene (Howth) - 815 (8.04%%)

-South Dublin County Council-
Mick Murphy (Tallaght Central) - 2,505 (16.1%) * ELECTED, top of poll

-Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council-
Lisa Maher (Dundrum) - 1,287 (7.4%) * Missed out on seat by 84 votes on 10th count

-Cork City Council-
Mick Barry (North Central) - 1390 (17.47%) * ELECTED, top of poll

-Limerick City Council-
Ashling Golden (Ward 3) - 153 (3.39%)

- Drogheda Borough Council -
Frank Gallagher (St Laurance's Gate) - 437 (13.43%) *On 1st count came third in 3 seat ward but finished 4th after transfers.

- Balbriggan Town Council -
Tadhg Kenehan - 175 (4.72%)

- Letterkenny Town Council -
Francie McCaferty - 65 (1.67%)

by f Mon Jun 14, 2004 05:45

The Belgian section of the CWI, Linkse Socialistische Partij (LSP), has recieved 14,166 votes in the Flanders constituency in the Euro elections. Although this is percentage wise a relativly small figure it does signify a big improvment on last years elections where LSP recieved 8,337 votes in the Senate election.

by SP Member Mon Jun 14, 2004 01:45

Euro Elections 1999

Joe Higgins 10,619 (3.78%)

Euro Elections 2004

Joe Higgins 23,218 (5.5%)

an increase of over 50% in percentage terms and more than double in terms of votes.

A very satisfactory result

by SP Member Mon Jun 14, 2004 01:35

Following on from the fine performance of the Socialist Party in England and the fantastic results here, we have just heard that the CWI in Germany has won its first council seat on Rostock City Council. Reports also suggest a possible win in Stuttgart.

by Pinko Mon Jun 14, 2004 01:16

Socialist Party candidate gets 23,218 in Dublin European election. That's 5.5%. Congratulations on a good result.

by political dyslexia Sun Jun 13, 2004 22:55

OK?
well done. make them your heartlands.
the voters (and the non voters) deserve you.
olé!

by Keyboard politics Sun Jun 13, 2004 22:00

Maybe the Tallzman is using a non-Irish&English kezboard. Just learn to accept cultural diveritz.

by Alphabet Soup Sun Jun 13, 2004 21:37

Surely "Tallzman" to those of us who have got used to the respective positions of the "z" and "y" keys on our keyboards?

by Brian C. Sun Jun 13, 2004 21:06

Tallyman, aren't you the same anonymous Sinn Feiner who was telling us before the elections that:

1) The Socialist Party would be lucky to hold two seats?

2) That we would be under pressure in Mulhuddart to hold a seat?

3) That Mick Murphy would be lucky to get the last seat in Tallaght and that Sinn Fein would take two seats there?

4) That we would get a low vote in Howth?

5) That Lisa Maher would get a few hundred votes in Dundrum, while Sinn Fein would be in the running for a seat?

I would have thought that given how your last lot of predictions turned out that you would be somewhat less brash on your reappearance here. Instead you pop back up, still hiding behind anonymity and still spitting bile.

Face it. You were wrong. The Socialist Party, and candidates to the left of Sinn Fein generally, did well. That includes Joan Collins, Pat Dunne, Ciaran Perry and Gino Kenny. Sinn Fein's rise is the main story of the election, along with the smaller gains made by Labour. However, instead of wiping out the socialist left those gains have been entirely at the expense at of Fianna Fail and other right wing candidates.

I have to admit that at the Dundrum count I found myself wishing that Sinn Fein had managed 28 more votes. If they had managed to edge out the PD and the order of elimination had therefore been slightly different, the Socialist Party might have won a fifth seat.

Now really, shouldn't you have something better to do than anonymously trolling this thread?

by Tallyman Sun Jun 13, 2004 20:44

Wake up and smell the coffee. Mary Lou got more than double the SP Euro vote. Also in Mulhuddart SF gained a seat that the SP expected to take. In the SP heartland of Fingal zou failed miserablz to make anz gains. Have you done a count of the seat gains by SF across Dublin.

How many seats did the SP take in Dublin City? Oops, dont mention Joan Collins. Labour also made gains in Dublin but I am sure the SP didnt notive this.

by f Sun Jun 13, 2004 20:35

Interestingly enough I think you'll find that the SP in many places they stood they cut across SF not the other way around. For example in Tallaght Central were SF were targetting 2 seats - Mick Murphy topped the poll. In Swords and Mulhuddart the SP outpolled SF. In Dundrum Lisa Maher easily defeated the SF candidate and the same is the case in Cork North Central. I also hear that from the tallies in West Dublin Joe Higgins outpolled SF's Mary Lou McDonald 2:1.

I think in the medium term it will be interesting to see if SF's seemingly endless electoral gains will be curtailed by the SP and other Socialist candidates.

by Brian C. Sun Jun 13, 2004 20:32

It appears that our anonymous friend "tallyman" still hasn't wiped the foam from his mouth.

There were a whole series of frankly rather stupid arguments between "tallyman" here, other supporters of Sinn Fein and at least one person from the Socialist Party in the run up to the election. I say stupid because there are few things sillier than people arguing about election results before they actually come in.

The Socialist Party went into this election hoping to increase our number of seats and our vote generally. We have achieved both targets. The areas where we expected to do well - Swords, Mulhuddart, Tallaght, Cork, Howth, Dundrum, Drogheda - we did in fact do well in. No great surprise to us, although I suspect something of a nasty shock to "tallyman".

Despite only having the resources to run a very limited campaign, Joe has increased his vote in the Dublin constituency.

A good day for us in other words, if obviously on a smaller scale than Sinn Fein's victories. Still I have no doubt that "tallyman" will treat us to yet more bile and vituperation from the comfort of anonymity.

by Tallyman Sun Jun 13, 2004 20:14

Spuppies were claiming that the SP would take 4 or 5 seats on Fingal. Didnt happen. The gains were made bz SF and the Greens. Joe Higgins hasnt done verz well in the Euros onlz up about 1% on the 1999 result.

The SP will trz and talk up the Tallaght and Cork gains but thez expected a lot more as was pbvious from the spuppies ravings prior to the elections.

by jeff Sun Jun 13, 2004 19:25

Ordinary people now have 17 seats ( that is, if fg, labour,sinn fein,etc,pool their voting power) against the fat cat satanic union that was ff/pd. Auf Wiedersein, Herr Harney.

by POM Sun Jun 13, 2004 19:02

CCFG
24 Cathaoireacha

Labour: 6
*Gerry McGuire, *Tom Kellegher, *Michael O'Donovan, *Peter Coyle, *Peggy Hamill, *Ciaran Byrne.

Fine Gael: 5
*Anne Devitt, Alan Farrell, *Joan Maher, *Michael Joe Cosgrave, *Leo Varadkar

Fianna Fail: 4
*Michael Kennedy, *Margaret Richardson, *Darragh O'Brien, Brenda Clifford

Green: 3
*Robert Kelly, David Healy, Joe Corr

SP: 2
*Clare Daly, *Ruth Coppinger.

PD: 1
Mags Murray

Sinn Fein: 1
Martin Christie

Ind: 2
*David O’Connor, May McKeon

by Tiredsoverytired Sun Jun 13, 2004 17:57

Many expected Sinn Fein's rise to flatten everybody to their left like a tidal wave. It turns out that most of the damage they did was to Fianna Fail, while socialists and independent lefts also did well.

The Socialist Party took four seats and narrowly missed out on three others. Lisa Maher finally lost on the last count when the transfers from a sitting FF councillor who was eliminated allowed a Fine Gaeler and a Fianna Failer to overtake her. She had been in fifth in the six seater and finished seventh. They also finished just outside the seats in Balbriggan and Drogheda Town Councils.

The SP's poll topping performances in Tallaght Central and Cork North Inner City strike me as particularly good results. Clare Daly was always going to romp home in Swords, while they will be pleased to get the largest vote of any party in Mulhuddart, easily keeping their seat there despite the absence of Joe Higgins.

Joan Collins, a left wing independent, took a seat in Crumlin with an impressive pile of votes. Ciaran Perry of Working Class Action was unlucky not to join her on the City Council, losing by less than a hundred votes. Joe Mooney, also of WCA, and John O'Neill of the Irish Socialist Network both get respectable totals.

South Dublin also saw some high votes for left candidates with Pat Dunne, an independent activise, just missing out in Terenure/Rathfarnham despite polling more than 2,000 first preferences. A surprisingly good vote of 1,000 for Gino Kenny of the SWP in Clondalkin raised a few eyebrows, although he was very much an outside bet for a seat once the first count had been completed.

That was pretty much the story of the SWP's night. Their candidates polled better than before, with even their weakest runners picking up three hundred or so votes. They put in very respectable showings in Ballyfermot, Dun Laoghaire and Bray without ever really being in contention for a seat.

The Workers Party had a rough night in comparison to the rest of the left in Dublin, but it looks as if they have managed to avoid obliteration in their last remaining stronghold in Waterford City. Reports indicate that they have managed to hold onto at least one councillor there and maybe two.

by Dominic Carroll Sun Jun 13, 2004 17:39

In common with many Cork socialists, I heartily congratulate Mick Barry on his success in topping the poll in his ward and winning a seat on Cork City Council. Mick Barry has long been a stalwart of the socialist movement in the city – not to mention in his previous incarnation as a Dublin socialist – and is thought of locally as wholly dependable, hard-working and non-sectarian. Good luck, Mick.