A Socialist Alliance (SA), mainly based around the Democratic Socialist Party (DSP) and the International Socialist Alliance (ISO), has been created for the upcoming Federal Elections. The Socialist Party's Denise Dudley looks at the new group.

The Socialist Party is not against alliances or mass parties. We call for a new workers' party based on the trade unions and community organisations. We simply feel that this SA isn't the way to go about it. Our first knowledge of this Alliance was on February 9th when we received an email inviting us to attend a meeting to discuss this formation. We had eight days to discuss the draft proposal and platform locally, nationally, internationally and within the rank and file of the Socialist Party. Obviously, we were not able to attend this meeting on this basis.

The DSP and the ISO had written the invitation and draft proposals and platforms sent to us by the SA. There was no explanation from the ISO as to why they had backflipped on standing in elections, after years of lecturing the rest of the left on the dangers of electoralism. The Socialist Party had many criticisms and questions regarding the 20-point draft proposal. One point makes mention of the alliance seeking to 'stand common candidates who are prepared and best able to advocate the aims of the alliance'. But what if we believe that one of our members should stand in a particular seat rather then, say, a DSP member? Local alliance groups will elect who is to stand in their area. What if the majority of members in the local alliance are DSP members and believe, as much as we do, that their candidate is better? Even if we are selected will we run the campaign or do we hand it over to the alliance?

SA is in reality a quasi-political party with a centralised structure (national committee, membership fee, name, constitution etc). It is jumping way ahead of what is possible right now, and in its current form could scare away groups of workers moving onto the political area. Many of these concerns were raised with the alliance when a special meeting was arranged in Melbourne recently. Jim O'Connor and myself met with Ian Runtoul (ISO), Graeme (DSP) and Alison Thorne (Freedom Socialist Party). We raised the fact that SP has a good name in elections (Stephen Jolly getting over 12% in the last Victorian State election and the recent credible result for Neil Grey in the WA election).

This result in the seat of Richmond was based on our participation over a seven-year period in important community struggles in the area. These struggles include the one year long campaign to save Richmond Secondary College in 1993, the campaign against freeway extensions (CAFE) in Collingwood in 1994, the campaign at the Australian Dying Company picket line in Clifton Hill in 1998/99, and the campaign for heroin reform (Community Campaign for Heroin Reform) launched in Smith St, Collingwood in 1999.

We felt that by joining the Alliance (which, as yet, has no history of struggle) we risk that good name and reputation. The question for us is whether the SA will develop into anything other than an alliance of existing left parties and a few radical individuals. If that's all it is, it's not worth us giving up our independent banner. If it attracts real forces, then we will intervene and help build it.

The representative of SA at the Melbourne meeting believed that it was possible to speak with union delegates and persuade them to support the formation. We tried earnestly to explain that no union would back a party without any past work. Another issue raised was our belief that if a new mass worker's party was to form, it really did have to come from real forces such as left unions, community organisations, groups of workers etc.

The alliance representatives assured us that even if we did not join they would not stand against us in seats (a non-aggression pact). I believe this remains to be seen especially if we stand in the seat of Melbourne. The pros and cons of SP joining the Alliance will be discussed at the Socialist Party National Conference in March.

Socialist Party gets highest vote on the Left

The determination in Labor areas to get rid of the Liberals was the main factor why Socialist Party candidate Neil Gray only received 259 votes (1.24%). However if we compare like with like the Socialist Party had a huge success. The Progressive Labor Party got 48 votes (0.41%) in Bunbury. The Democratic Socialist Party received 98 votes (0.53%) in Perth and 115 (0.57%) in Fremantle.

The Socialist Party to the streets with a military strategy to blitz the seat of Maylands with the socialist message. We distributed 10,000 leaflets (11 different leaflets over 8 weeks) and ran a stall or street activity almost every day. We had large feature articles for Neil in the Western Australian and every edition of the local newspapers for the election period. This is despite a virtual media ban on the small parties. Our media

campaign was more successful than the Greens!

On only one occasion did we see any other candidate campaign in Maylands. Yet they were out in force on polling day! What contempt for the people of Maylands! What a heartless vote-grabbing approach to an area wracked with social problems of housing, health, education and a huge drug problem. None of the other candidates were there every day to see the mentally and physically challenged struggle with minimum support from the health agencies. Nor to listen to every second person who had been directly or indirectly affected by the heroin crisis. This was one of our main campaign issues. We received huge support on this campaign getting 1,000 signatures, raised almost $400 on Heroin Campaign stalls and were sincerely thanked hundreds of times by people for honestly trying to do something about the problem.

From this election campaign we have grown and built links with the youth and trade unions. The Socialist Party has laid the basis for a much larger and dynamic Socialist Party in WA. We will dig deep roots into the working class communities, the trade unions and the youth of WA.

Labor was elected through the biggest protest vote in WA history. The Liberal government had introduced draconian anti-trade union laws, overseen cuts in the health service and education. They pursed the deforestation of large chunks of WA, starved agencies that were trying to address the problem of deaths from heroin and built stupid bell towers to show they were progressing the image of WA.

In working class metropolitan electorates there was a determination to get rid of the Liberals. There was an 11% swing against the Liberals, but only 1.6% went directly to Labor who won mainly due to preferences. Many youth voted for the Greens, seeing them as the most progressive alternative available in the election. They now hold the balance of power in the Upper House. Until a strong left alternative is created, the Greens will continue to capture a big chunk of the youth and ex-Labor vote. The 10% State wide vote for the racist One Nation Party was a protest vote of very confused voters. Many One Nation voters were not aware that the party is anti-trade union, racist, and totally unconcerned in providing an improvement in conditions for ordinary people.

The Liberal Party will not expose them. They are almost as right wing, but neither will Labor because Labor are the left faction of an almost one party state. Labor are almost as pro-big business as the Liberals and will not upset big business in WA. A right-wing Labor government in a recession is guaranteed to disappoint leading to One Nation gaining in support. The Socialist Party calls for the unions and community organisations to set up a new workers' party to fill the vacuum-in the meantime we will fight hard to partially fill this vacuum ourselves.

Sub-Saharan Africa has 70% of the world's Aids sufferers. Botswana has 35% of its population HIV-positive! South Africa has the most HIV-positive people of any country - 4 million, with 1,700 new cases every day! Aids activists in the region are fighting for the mass production of cheap, generic drugs to combat the disease. The vast majority of people cannot afford the prices of the brand name drugs from the pharmaceutical companies.

These companies are using 'free trade' laws to put their profits before the needs of millions of sick people, arguing that allowing generic drugs would cut their profits and future investment. Under pressure Clinton made some concessions to Africa, the Bush administration will probably move to reverse these changes.

A leaked Centrelink memo has revealed the Government is attempting to privatise Centrelink. Howard plans to make money from the privatisation of Centrelink to make up for a spending splurge before the election. A meeting in February 2002 of the Coalition Expenditure Review Committee has already been arranged! The memo states the meeting will be held "in an environment where the objective will be significant funding cuts."

Construction unions launch new industrial campaign 400 delegates from Victoria's construction unions voted last month to launch a militant campaign for better long service leave (Coinvest). While Victoria normally sets the national standards for wages and conditions, for long service leave it is behind the eight ball. Workers have to wait 15 years to get their long service leave or 10 years for a pro-rata payment. We want to reduce this period to 10 and 7 years respectively. We also demand a payout of accumulated funds to the families of dead workers, something that is banned now despite the fact Coinvest has over $350 million in funds!

In fact Coinvest is so profitable, employers have not had to pay any contributions for 11 years. Only 27% of members ever see a cent in long service leave. The rort has to stop. A motion from the floor to strike for 24 hours the following day was passed unanimously at the delegates meeting. Thereafter an agreed industrial strategy to win the campaign will be employed.

Rank and file members of all construction unions are keen that this campaign stays united and a resolution that any deal had to be approved first at a delegates meeting was passed. We do not want some union leaders taking offers and then cutting and running as we saw in last year's shorter hours campaign.

The Yallourn dispute is currently slowing dragging through the court system. Management have refused to seriously negotiate with the La Trobe Valley CFMEU (energy division) over the EBA. Last December, workers voted to ignore advice from more moderate elements of the union leadership and support their local leaders in rejecting the third rate EBA offer from Yallourn Energy. The CFMEU is expecting an order from the bosses' courts as bad as Yallourn's offer. If workers reject that, a lockout is possible.

At that stage a MUA-style scanario will develop. Socialists and activetrade unionists must prepare to back the CFMEU to the hilt. A defeat here would devastate the Valley and lead to more attacks elsewhere. In the meantime, you can support the workers by raising money, inviting a speaker to your workplace, attend the court cases and so on. Contact the Yallourn Workers Support Group on (03)5126 1679 or (03)9662 9688