In her comment piece on 22 June (High risk can yield high
rewards), Polly Toynbee states "[Brown's] overture to the Liberal
Democrats was a masterstroke. It calls time on a 100-year-old feud
between parties that now struggle to invent separate identities."
It is particularly galling for those in the labour and trade
union movement that Gordon Brown has approached Liberal Democrats
about joining his cabinet. Over one hundred years ago there was a
debate within the workers' movement as to who could best give a
political voice to working people – should trade unionists
concentrate on putting pressure on the 'progressive capitalist'
Liberal Party or should they fight for their own independent
political voice.
Tony Blair has in the past stated that he felt the break with the
Liberals had been a historical mistake, and now Gordon Brown is
proving in action that he holds the same belief. It must be clear to
all now that there will be no 'shift to the left' under a Brown
premiership.
Polly also states: "Already in the wind there are good signals
that Brown means change – in Whitehall, in No 10, in openness and
probity." Openness? Probity? Throughout his leadership 'campaign'
Gordon Brown made no mention of his plans to woo Liberal Democrats.
Therefore, the question remains, should working people
concentrate on putting pressure on the 'capitalist' Labour Party (it
can not even be described as progressive) or should they fight for
their own independent political voice?
More and more people are thinking the latter, with almost 3,000
having drawn the conscious conclusion that a new party for working
people is necessary and signed up to our campaign. If it goes ahead,
a 'government of the talents' will be a 'cabinet of cutters' and a
'parliament of privatisers' and can only result in even greater
numbers of working class people deciding that we need a party of our
own which can take a principled stand against the politics of the
establishment parties.
Cllr Dave Nellist
National Chair
Campaign for a New
Workers' Party
