Part Seven

Could the bin tax be defeated by lobbying or pressure on the parties?

In our view the leadership of the city campaign grouped around Dermot Connolly, Joan Collins and the SWP sowed illusions in the potential to beat the tax through a vote on the city council.

On the councils all the established parties have moved further to the right since the water charges in the mid 1990s and all accepted the policy of bin charges. All the parties on Dublin City Council, in particular Labour and Sinn Fein, tried to obscure this reality by saying one thing publicly but then they would engage in behind the scenes manoeuvres during the estimates processes. The parties knew that they would be damaged by supporting the bin tax so in order to try to minimise the damage, an agreement would be reached as to which councillors would vote in favour, who against and who would be missing. Councillors in the same party would vote different ways so that the most vulnerable councillors or parties could claim to be against the bin tax. At the same time enough of their councillors would vote for or be absent to ensure that the estimates would be passed including the bin tax.

This charade was designed to make sure there was a majority for the tax manufactured in a way that created as much confusion as possible regarding the real position of the parties or individual councillors. This political game and in particular Sinn Fein's involvement in it were big issues when the city campaign was first established.

This wheeling and dealing in favour of the bin tax could be challenged but only if the campaign had deep roots in all the communities and was able to mobilise significant sections of the working class. Then the pro bin tax stance of the parties' could have been put under real pressure. Unfortunately the city campaign was not that strong and in that context, political protests and pressure was only likely to have a limited impact. Any idea that standing against these parties in the elections or lobbying around the estimates would or could force a political retreat on the bin tax was ruled out.

In his article mentioned earlier Dermot Connolly says: "The pressure on the Councillors, the 50/50 votes every year, forcing the government to change the law, taking away Councillors' rights to vote on these issues, demonstrated the unpopularity of the tax, the mass opposition to it, and the ability of the campaign to organise this pressure."

From Anti Bin Tax News, a paper produced by the city campaign in late 2003, dealing with the same point: "The pressure that has come on the elected Councillors has been such that the bin tax has only scrapped through for the last three years on Dublin City Council. For the majority of these Councillors this has not been a principled stand, but fear of losing their seats in the next local elections."

If the pressure from the city campaign had been so intense and had created a real 50/50 position in terms of the votes on the council estimates, then emphasising the tactic of political pressure would have been very important and could have achieved results! Unfortunately the opposite was the case. Putting forward a line of argument that the tax "had only scrapped through for the last three years" and to imply that it was the Government’s serious concern that the city councillors would vote out the tax that led them to change the law, certainly helps create the view, an illusion, that there was a chance that the bin tax could be voted out.

The information and analysis included in these quotes is not only incorrect, it is dishonest. The political charade and the manufacturing of votes by the parties were known to all the leading members of the city campaign. The councillors and their parties were never under such intense pressure that they came seriously close to ever voting out the tax. These close votes were manufactured but the actual majority support for the bin tax remained crushing.

Unfortunately these ideas and arguments were put forward in the city campaign at various stages and served to miss-direct people and cause confusion regarding what the campaign was really facing and what needed to be done. (For clarification the change in the law did not fundamentally cut across the power of councillors to scrap the bin tax. They still had the power to oppose the bin tax by voting down the manager’s estimates).

Overstating the pressure that the campaign was able to generate was partly rooted in the desire of some campaign leaders to talk up what they had built. Likewise the overstatement of the pressure that the councillors and the council were under regarding the bin tax was used to add weight to the argument that campaign candidates could have a real impact on the council if elected, thereby boosting the positions and prospects of some individuals and parties.

The price for such incorrect arguments was to create illusions as to what political pressure could achieve. Instead of an honest explanation, the real situation and the tasks that flowed from it became obscured. The importance of organising to defeat non-collection, as the single most important task facing the campaign, was diminished. Creating false illusions inevitably brought disappointment and dis-orientation to some activists and members of the campaign when the actual struggle didn’t develop in the way expected.

A wrong estimation of and approach to Labour and Sinn Fein

The position of Dermot Connolly, Joan Collins and the SWP in both the city and Dun Laoghaire campaigns was characterised by a retreat from a militant approach to struggle. This retreat was rooted in a desire to find an easier path; one which they believed would be more acceptable to people than the struggle that was actually necessary to defeat the bin tax. As shown earlier they were actually way behind the attitudes of many working class people.

Inevitably this shift to the right politically was not restricted to tactical issues regarding non-collection. These campaign leaders helped create illusions by overstating the capability of the city campaign to exert pressure and by understating the commitment of the establishment parties to support the bin tax on the city council. However the post election statements of the SWP and Joan Collins regarding Labour and Sinn Fein go further and raise the question as to whether Joan Collins, Dermot Connolly and the leaders of the SWP actually developed illusions in the possibility that Labour and Sinn Fein would play a progressive role on the issue of the bin tax!

The following is a quote from Cllr. Joan Collins from an article in Socialist Worker (PDF) 7 July 04: "The vote for Labour and Sinn Fein was also an Anti Bin Tax vote. Labour and Sinn Fein and the Independents have a clear majority on Dublin City Council (28 out of 52 seats). I will be demanding that this majority is used against the Bin Tax. This election is an opportunity for all those on the left. Hopefully we can take this opportunity and work together to fight for working class people."

This position that Labour and Sinn Fein are on the "left" and the idea of working with them not just on the bin tax but generally is echoed by the SWP in a second article on the same page when they say: "Dublin City Council now has a majority of left wing councillors. They have a clear mandate to bring change in Dublin and to put pay to the bin tax. Councillors from Sinn Fein, from the Labour Party and Independents need to seize this opportunity to implement the wishes of the people of Dublin."

While the SWP article [in the same issue] states "it would be betrayal…if they (Sinn Fein and Labour) breathe life into the failed right wing parties by doing deals", the overwhelming balance and tone of the two articles is positive regarding what Sinn Fein and Labour could do. This position was put forward despite the fact that in the 23 June issue (PDF), the SWP noted that Labour was already arranging pacts with Fine Gael on the councils and despite the fact that the SWP were fully aware of the reactionary deals that had been hatched during previous estimates meetings!

An SWP newsletter issued in Ballyfermot by Brid Smith in July 04, under the heading "Well done – great election result" stated: "Congratulations to the three councillors elected in this area, Tony Smithers (Sinn Fein), Michael Conaghan (Labour) and Vincent Jackson (Independent). All three are supporters for the Campaign Against the Bin Tax and clearly stated their opposition to this double tax in their manifestos."

And a couple of paragraphs later: "What we have to do over the coming months is to ensure that those we elected to the Council stick with this campaign and vote down the estimates of the City Council in December because of the bin charges. Over the next few months the Campaign Against the Bin Tax will be lobbying our local councillors for their support. We will organise public meetings in the autumn and invite all the councillors. We look forward to their full backing for the campaign and their continued opposition to double taxation."

Here the SWP congratulate and praise individual members of these parties and in so doing personalise and diminish important political issues. Do these individuals deserve such credit; have they put in such hard work over the last four years that they deserve such an endorsement? What is crucial is that Labour and Sinn Fein councillors all share the responsibility for the role that their party has played on the issue. In that context the attitude adopted in the name of the Campaign Against the Bin Tax (on an SWP leaflet) towards these politicians and their parties is uncritical and wrong and hides the real role that these parties have played in the battle.

A very important aspect of this battle has been that it helped show that despite the fact they are "opposition" parties, both Labour and Sinn Fein have shifted significantly to the right and have little interest in serious involvement in genuine struggles in the communities. These parties have never been "with" the anti-bin tax campaign. Labour’s role regarding local charges and double taxation is disgraceful and while Sinn Fein has publicly stated their opposition to bin charges, their opposition is hollow and is seriously questioned by many working class activists. They don’t have any principled opposition to bin charges and have voted for them in other areas when it suits. While perhaps individuals, particularly in Sinn Fein, may have played an active role, these parties have not been part of the movement.

This newsletter in reality implies that these individuals and their parties are in an alliance with the anti-bin tax campaign. It implies that they too were anti-bin tax candidates and that a vote for them was also purposeful in the struggle against the bin tax! Some sections of the working class have illusions in Labour and Sinn Fein. The idea of standing anti-bin tax candidates was to make all the parties accountable on the issue and to provide an alternative and win people away from all the established parties including Labour and Sinn Fein. The approach taken here is uncritical and instead of exposing them, helps these parties hide their role on the bin tax. No hint at all is given about their likely sell out on the issue, instead people are asked to "look forward to their full backing".

That socialists, people who would claim to be part of the revolutionary left, take such an approach is incredible. Many workers and youth are looking for a fighting, radical political alternative to these parties. These are key sections of the working class. Socialists should play a role of helping to raise consciousness and assist people to struggle in the best way possible. Instead political opportunism led these socialists to create illusions in wrong methods of struggle and in reactionary capitalist parties, which in turn weakens the working class politically and can lead to demoralisation. They may argue that it is important to be positive and skilful when a campaign is criticising parties that have significant support. That’s correct but there is a world of difference between skilful criticism that points a way forward for the movement and the absence of any political analysis and criticism, which just re-enforces any illusions or support that may exist for certain actions or parties. The above quotes from Joan Collins and the SWP are examples of the latter.

Around this time the idea of amending the council estimates to exclude the bin tax was seriously raised at the city steering committee and certainly at one campaign public meeting in the Crumlin area organised by Joan Collins. Trying to come up with new measures that would replace the amount the council gets from the bin tax was a wrong approach. Even if an appropriate amendment that didn’t hit the working class could be found, there was no way given the political make up on the council that it would be accepted. In this situation there was no value in raising the issue of amendments but the approach is dangerous as it gives credence to the financial arguments that the council has to implement charges on the working class because of a lack of cash. That actually undermines the basis of the campaign’s principled opposition to the bin tax. If continued to its conclusion it could lead to accepting charges in some form. The campaign needs to restate its demand that local charges should be abolished and local authorities should in turn be funded properly by central government.

The Socialist Party took a different approach to the estimates process, the position of Labour and Sinn Fein and the tasks for the campaigns. From Socialist Voice Sept. 04:

[T]he Socialist Party has no illusions that Labour and or Sinn Fein will be prepared to take on the government on this issue by voting out the bin tax.

The argument will be raised especially by sections of the Labour Party, that if a budget isn’t agreed, then the government will abolish the council. Labour and Sinn Fein candidates stood in the elections in opposition to the bin tax. If these parties were serious about opposing the bin tax, then together with the three independent councillors they should stand alongside the anti-bin tax campaign and the communities in order to defeat the government’s threats.

In the Dublin City and Dun Laoghaire/Rathdown areas preparation is now essential to strengthen the anti-bin tax campaigns for the battle against non-collection, which will most likely take place in the new year. Campaign activists should use the activities over the next few months to re-organise and prepare the local campaigns for the real battle – the battle against non-collection. The most likely outcome of the estimates process is that the bin tax will remain. Therefore preparing activists in the communities for a campaign of community based direct action against non-collection is the most important priority for the anti-bin tax campaign."

Estimates for 2005 – just the latest sell-out!

The 2005 estimates process was concluded in early December 04 and it confirmed the analysis of the Socialist Party. If the position about the closeness of the previous council votes, the role of Labour and Sinn Fein and the significance of the local election results were correct, then these estimates should have been a very close affair. While a recorded vote wasn’t taken, it is generally accepted that the vote in favour of the estimates and therefore the bin tax was 30 to 15 approximately, the biggest majority in recent years. So much for a left majority on the city council! There is some dispute as to who exactly made up the 15 but The Irish Times reported that it included the Independents, Sinn Fein and 2 out of the 15 Labour councillors.

The support of the Labour Party for the estimates was guaranteed. With a majority of the Labour councillors prepared to vote for the estimates, Sinn Fein didn’t have to organise any of their ranks to vote in favour or be absent as happened in a previous year. They had the luxury of being able to have all their councillors voting against but only because there was no chance the estimates could be defeated. It is much easier to be radical when you know it is for show and will make no difference at all. There is little doubt that politically Sinn Fein are prepared for some of their councillors to be "responsible" and vote for the bin tax in Dublin if they deem it in the party’s interest, just as they did in Sligo. Their contribution this year to the charade was limited to not calling for or supporting the demand for a recorded vote, presumably to save their colleagues from the other political parties some embarrassment.

Michael Conaghan, the Labour councillor from Ballyfermot praised by the SWP didn’t vote in favour or against the estimates as he had been elected Mayor of the City of Dublin and was chairing the meeting. However for someone who was considered a campaign supporter and opposed to the bin tax, he didn’t use his position as Mayor to speak out in any serious way about the bin tax or assist the struggle against this attack on the working class.

The over emphasising of political lobbying; the sowing of illusions in votes at the council and in the role of Labour and Sinn Fein as opposed to conducting a serious struggle damaged the anti bin tax campaigns. The key tasks facing the campaigns were obscured and instead of helping to raise the fighting spirit and understanding of the communities, this approach laid the basis for confusion and demoralisation as the battle unfolded.

With the bin tax endorsed by a clear majority of councillors in December ’04, officials in Dublin City Council implemented non-collection in the early part of the year in the parts of the city with a bag only collection service. Their aim is to reduce non-payment through non-collection, picking off areas bit by bit.

It is vital that the battle against non-collection is fought fully. It is likely that we will see a repeat of the division that opened up in late 2003, with some engaging in tokenistic protests and others trying to organise resistance and actions to ensure that all bins are collected.

A shift to the right

Parties, groups or individuals cannot be politically characterised by what they say about themselves. Who votes for or supports them is important but is also not decisive. Parties must be characterised by their actual positions, their actions and the role they play. For revolutionary socialists like Joan Collins and the SWP to use the term "Left" as a general description of Labour and Sinn Fein is a serious mistake and can create confusion as to whether it is necessary or not to build a new party to represent the working class.

In the past the Labour Party had a dual character. On the one hand, a pro capitalist leadership but on the other a significant working class membership, an organised left wing, as well as a link to the trade union movement. The Party has moved decisively to the right and there is now no serious left wing and support for coalitionism with either Fianna Fail or Fine Gael is generalised in the party. Labour is a capitalist party that attempts to put forward a liberal face on social issues. The most advanced sections of the working class don’t look towards it as a real alternative or a vehicle for getting organised. The link with the unions exists but in reality it is now a link to the union tops, with many of the worst union bureaucrats being Labour members.

Sinn Fein has grown significantly in the last years. The ending of the IRA’s military campaign was crucial in opening up the prospects for it to grow electorally and in terms of membership. They are still seen by many as anti establishment, although the illusions that they are a radical force have diminished compared to a couple of years ago. Some members may have left wing views but they are a small minority. In fact notwithstanding their public image, Sinn Fein has also moved significantly to the right, accepted capitalism and organised privatisation when in the Northern Executive. They are not rooted in the labour and trade union movement or in the working class tradition. They recently gave prominence to their celebration of the 100th Anniversary of their founding by the reactionary Arthur Griffith. Despite their posturing, Sinn Fein is a right wing, nationalist party and are incapable of representing or assisting the working class in becoming organised on a left basis.

The Socialist Party understands that these parties have significant support amongst the working class and that support could increase in the next general election. However that doesn’t legitimise their policies and doesn’t change the fact that politically these parties are not vehicles through which the working class can get organised and fight back. They are very likely to implement very serious attacks on the working class if/when they become part of a coalition government in the south. While it is necessary to take these parties up in a skilful way, there is no room for confusion or prevarication. It is an important task for socialists to try to politically affect those sections of the working class who support these parties in order to put forward how a real alternative can be built. That is not done by referring to these as "left" but by explaining the real role that Labour and Sinn Fein will play.

Exposing Labour and Sinn Fein is very important in underpinning the argument for a new mass party, which will assist the re-organisation of the working class politically. That is something Joan Collins and the SWP seem to place a lot of emphasis on which makes their description of Labour and Sinn Fein confusing. Instead of re-enforcing the illusion that Labour and Sinn Fein are "left" or putting forward political positions that orientate the working class towards them as potentially positive factors in the movement, socialists should be showing the clear distance between the needs of the working class on the one hand and these parties on the other.

That they refer to these parties as "left" when both are moving to the right says a lot about the shift in Joan Collins and the SWP’s own political positions. Unfortunately they are moving away from a socialist outlook. It has been a certain refrain on the left over the last years that the lines of difference between the different trends on the revolutionary left have diminished in significance and become blurred. We never agreed with that view but instead what has become blurred are the lines of difference between some revolutionary socialists and the ideas of reformism which holds to the illusion that it is possible to modify capitalism so that it will provide for the needs of the working class.

The key leaflets distributed by the SWP’s Brid Smith, Richard Boyd Barrett and Joan Collins in the local elections don’t contain any demands or points of programme that outline, advocate or even mention the need for socialism. This shift in their respective political positions is taking place in the context of the ideological retreat that has taken place internationally amongst many in the revolutionary and Marxist left. This retreat started after the collapse of the Stalinist regimes in Russia and Eastern Europe but is continuing right up until today.

<-Next->